Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38834069›Full record

ReviewNeuron2024

Principles of cortical areas and their implications for neuroimaging.

Steven E Petersen, Benjamin A Seitzman, Steven M Nelson, Gagan S Wig, Evan M Gordon

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neuron, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

46 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. A causal role for the posterior corpus callosum in bimanual coordination.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Steven E PetersenMallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA; Department of Neurology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA; Department of Biomedical Engineering, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO 63130, USA; Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO 63130, USA; Department of Pediatrics, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA.
Benjamin A SeitzmanMallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA.
Steven M NelsonDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA; Masonic Institute for the Developing Brain, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA.
Gagan S WigCenter for Vital Longevity, School of Behavioral and Brain Sciences, University of Texas at Dallas, Dallas, TX 75235, USA; Department of Psychiatry, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX 75390, USA.
Evan M GordonMallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA. Electronic address: egordon@wustl.edu.

Funding

Socioeconomic Mediators of Adult Brain Network Resilience and Vulnerability to Cognitive DeclineR01AG063930 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS DALLAS · PI WIG, GAGAN S · 2019 to 2023
$2.9M
NIA NIH HHS R01 AG063930
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cortical organization should constrain the study of how the brain performs behavior and cognition. A fundamental concept in cortical organization is that of arealization: that the cortex is parceled into discrete areas. In part one of this report, we review how non-human animal studies have illuminated principles of cortical arealization by revealing: (1) what defines a cortical area, (2) how cortical areas are formed, (3) how cortical areas interact with one another, and (4) what "computations" or "functions" areas perform. In part two, we discuss how these principles apply to neuroimaging research. In doing so, we highlight several examples where the commonly accepted interpretation of neuroimaging observations requires assumptions that violate the principles of arealization, including nonstationary areas that move on short time scales, large-scale gradients as organizing features, and cortical areas with singular functionality that perfectly map psychological constructs. Our belief is that principles of neurobiology should strongly guide the nature of computational explanations.

Indexed as

Cerebral CortexNeuroimagingAnimalsBrain MappingHumans

Identifiers

PMID38834069
PMCPMC13339775

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.