Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40491186›Full record

ReviewNMR in biomedicine2025

Physiological Confounds in BOLD-fMRI and Their Correction.

Abdoljalil Addeh, Rebecca J Williams, Ali Golestani, G Bruce Pike, M Ethan MacDonald

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in NMR in biomedicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Abdoljalil AddehDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Schulich School of Engineering, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Rebecca J WilliamsFaculty of Health, Charles Darwin University, Darwin, Northern Territory, Australia.
Ali GolestaniDepartment of Medical Physics, Alberta Heath Services, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
G Bruce PikeDepartment of Radiology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
M Ethan MacDonaldDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Schulich School of Engineering, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5421-3536

Funding

Campus Alberta Innovates Chair programCanadian Institutes for Health Research FDN-143290Early Career Researcher Supplement DGECR-00124Eyes High Doctoral Recruitment ScholarshipNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council RGPIN-03880Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council Brain CreateNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council Discovery Grant RGPIN-03552UCalgary
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) has opened new frontiers in neuroscience by instrumentally driving our understanding of brain function and development. Despite its substantial successes, fMRI studies persistently encounter obstacles stemming from inherent, unavoidable physiological confounds. The adverse effects of these confounds are especially noticeable with higher magnetic fields, which have been gaining momentum in fMRI experiments. This review focuses on the four major physiological confounds impacting fMRI studies: low-frequency fluctuations in both breathing depth and rate, low-frequency fluctuations in the heart rate, thoracic movements, and cardiac pulsatility. Over the past three decades, numerous correction techniques have emerged to address these challenges. Correction methods have effectively enhanced the detection of task-activated voxels and minimized the occurrence of false positives and false negatives in functional connectivity studies. While confound correction methods have merit, they also have certain limitations. For instance, model-based approaches require externally recorded physiological data that is often unavailable in fMRI studies. Methods reliant on independent component analysis, on the other hand, need prior knowledge about the number of components. Machine learning techniques, although showing potential, are still in the early stages of development and require additional validation. This article reviews the mechanics of physiological confound correction methods, scrutinizes their performance and limitations, and discusses their impact on fMRI studies.

Indexed as

ArtifactsMagnetic Resonance ImagingAnimalsBrainHumansBOLD‐fMRIcardiac confounddata‐driven approachesexternal recordingmodel‐based approachesrespiratory confound

Identifiers

PMID40491186
PMCPMC12149699

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.