ArticleNeuroImage2025
Bayesian deconvolution for computational cognitive modeling of fMRI data.
Article in NeuroImage, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A central goal of cognitive neuroscience is to make inferences about underlying cognitive processes from observable data. However, current fMRI analysis tools cannot directly estimate latent parameters in computational cognitive models from blood-oxygen-level-dependent (BOLD) signal. Here, we present a novel Bayesian deconvolution technique for full hierarchical generative cognitive modeling of fMRI timeseries data. We validated this approach by applying Bayesian deconvolution to the monetary incentive delay (MID) task to identify processes underlying incentive anticipation in a sample of 54 individuals who underwent 2 scan sessions as part of a clinical trial for anxiety and depression. Based on a series of Bayesian models, we found evidence that striatal reward region activity reflects incentive prediction error rather than raw incentive value during anticipation of monetary loss or gain. Test-retest analyses found that individual parameters estimated using a generative Bayesian learning model (including a persistent prior parameter and a β parameter representing a scaling term between prediction error and BOLD signal) were estimated more reliably than an index derived from traditional fMRI analysis (beta value for contrast between gain and no gain during anticipation). Our method holds potential for broad application to diverse neural processes and individual differences in health and disease.
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.