Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39033247›Full record

ArticleCommunications biology2024

Dissecting task-based fMRI activity using normative modelling: an application to the Emotional Face Matching Task.

Hannah S Savage, Peter C R Mulders, Philip F P van Eijndhoven, Jasper van Oort, Indira Tendolkar, Janna N Vrijsen, Christian F Beckmann, Andre F Marquand

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Communications biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Hannah S SavageDonders Institute of Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. hannah.savage@donders.ru.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-9111-3013
Peter C R MuldersDonders Institute of Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-7867-5513
Philip F P van EijndhovenDonders Institute of Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Jasper van OortDonders Institute of Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Indira TendolkarDonders Institute of Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Janna N VrijsenDonders Institute of Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Christian F BeckmannDonders Institute of Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Andre F MarquandDonders Institute of Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. andre.marquand@donders.ru.nl.ORCID 0000-0001-5903-203X

Funding

Quantifying Individual Differences in Midlife Structural Brain Integrity Associated with Later AD/ADRD RiskR01AG049789 · NIA · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI AHMAD R. HARIRI, TERRIE E MOFFITT · 2015 to 2026
$10.6M
Self-Regulation Failure: Identifying and Modifying a Risk PhenotypeR01DA031579 · NIDA · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI HARIRI, AHMAD R., STRAUMAN, TIMOTHY J · 2010 to 2012
$1.9M
Neurogenetic Pathways to Drug Use in Young AdultsR01DA033369 · NIDA · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI HARIRI, AHMAD R. · 2013 to 2016
$1.4M
A Compute Cluster for Brain Imaging and AnalysisS10OD021480 · OD · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI SONG, ALLEN W · 2016 to 2016
$568k
Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research) 012-200-013Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research) 17854NIA NIH HHS R01 AG049789NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA031579NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA033369NIH HHS S10 OD021480U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | National Institutes of Health (NIH) R01AG049789U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | National Institutes of Health (NIH) R01DA033369Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust (Wellcome) 215573/Z/19/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Functional neuroimaging has contributed substantially to understanding brain function but is dominated by group analyses that index only a fraction of the variation in these data. It is increasingly clear that parsing the underlying heterogeneity is crucial to understand individual differences and the impact of different task manipulations. We estimate large-scale (N = 7728) normative models of task-evoked activation during the Emotional Face Matching Task, which enables us to bind heterogeneous datasets to a common reference and dissect heterogeneity underlying group-level analyses. We apply this model to a heterogenous patient cohort, to map individual differences between patients with one or more mental health diagnoses relative to the reference cohort and determine multivariate associations with transdiagnostic symptom domains. For the face>shapes contrast, patients have a higher frequency of extreme deviations which are spatially heterogeneous. In contrast, normative models for faces>baseline have greater predictive value for individuals' transdiagnostic functioning. Taken together, we demonstrate that normative modelling of fMRI task-activation can be used to illustrate the influence of different task choices and map replicable individual differences, and we encourage its application to other neuroimaging tasks in future studies.

Indexed as

EmotionsMagnetic Resonance ImagingAdultBrainBrain MappingFacial ExpressionFacial RecognitionFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID39033247
PMCPMC11271583

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.