ArticleHeliyon2024
The reverberation of implementation errors in a neuroimaging meta-analytic software package: A citation analysis to a technical report on GingerALE.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Which software packages did researchers use to meta-analyze fMRI data? A literature survey from 2019 to 2024.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
GingerALE, a widely used neuroimaging meta-analysis software package, contained errors in earlier versions that were later corrected. The technical report "Implementation errors in the GingerALE Software: description and recommendations" by Eickhoff et al. (2017) documented these errors and their corresponding fixes. In the current study, the papers that cited the GingerALE technical report were analyzed to identify the reasons for these citations. In August 2023, a search through Web of Science Core Collection identified 158 papers that cited the GingerALE technical report. These papers were manually examined to extract the citation statements and code the citation reasons into 12 categories. The analysis revealed that the most frequent reason for citing the report was to justify the use of a specific statistical threshold, followed by a simple acknowledgement of using GingerALE, acknowledging the impact of the errors in earlier versions of GingerALE on prior studies or the lack of effect on current results, and justifying the number of experiments in a meta-analysis. A small number of reasons related to non-GingerALE software, matters not related to activation likelihood estimation (ALE), or statements not mentioned in the GingerALE technical report.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.