ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2024
Validity and specificity of BOLD effects and their correction in
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Real-Time Neurofeedback Training to Modulate Glutamate-Glutamine Concentration Using Functional Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy.NMR in biomedicine · 2026Article
- Age-related GABA- and glutamatergic differences in SMA during bimanual coordination.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to characterize blood oxygen level-dependent (BOLD) effects in proton magnetic resonance ( Methods: For a more comprehensive understanding of BOLD effects detected with functional magnetic resonance spectroscopy (fMRS) and to optimize the correction method, a 1 Hz line-narrowing effect was simulated. Then, proton functional magnetic resonance spectroscopy ( Results: Significant mean increases in water and N-acetylaspartate (NAA) peak heights (+1.1% and +4.5%, respectively) were found to be accompanied by decreased linewidths (-0.5 Hz and -2.8%) upon optogenetic stimulation. These estimates were used for further defining an accurate line-broadening (lb) factor. The usage of a non-data-driven lb introduced false-positive errors in the metabolite concentration change estimates, thereby altering the specificity of the findings. The water and metabolite BOLD contributions were separated using different water scalings within LCModel. Conclusion: The linewidth-matching procedure using a precise lb factor remains the most effective approach for accurately quantifying small (±0.3 μmol/g) metabolic changes in
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.