ArticleGigaScience2024
Harnessing population diversity: in search of tools of the trade.
Article in GigaScience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Feature selection leads to divergent neurobiological interpretations of brain-based machine learning biomarkers.Nature human behaviour · 2026Article
- Deterministic Overlapping Multimorbidity Phenotypes for Leakage-Safe EHR Modeling of Incident Cognitive Impairment in All of Us.Journal of interdisciplinary research applied to medicine · 2026Article
- Carriers of LRRK2 pathogenic variants show a milder, anatomically distinct brain signature of Parkinson's disease.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- Latent brain subtypes of chronotype reveal unique behavioral and health profiles across population cohorts.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Overlooked features lead to divergent neurobiological interpretations of brain-based machine learning biomarkers.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Big neuroscience datasets are not big small datasets when it comes to quantitative data analysis. Neuroscience has now witnessed the advent of many population cohort studies that deep-profile participants, yielding hundreds of measures, capturing dimensions of each individual's position in the broader society. Indeed, there is a rebalancing from small, strictly selected, and thus homogenized cohorts toward always larger, more representative, and thus diverse cohorts. This shift in cohort composition is prompting the revision of incumbent modeling practices. Major sources of population stratification increasingly overshadow the subtle effects that neuroscientists are typically studying. In our opinion, as we sample individuals from always wider diversity backgrounds, we will require a new stack of quantitative tools to realize diversity-aware modeling. We here take inventory of candidate analytical frameworks. Better incorporating driving factors behind population structure will allow refining our understanding of how brain-behavior relationships depend on human subgroups.
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.