Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40625401›Full record

ArticlePNAS nexus2025

Deconstructing neural predictors of risky choice.

Leili Mortazavi, Charlene C Wu, Elnaz Ghasemi, Brian Knutson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PNAS nexus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

4 authors.

Leili MortazaviDepartment of Psychology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9838-4935
Charlene C WuDepartment of Psychology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7791-8050
Elnaz GhasemiDepartment of Psychology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-5415-9068
Brian KnutsonDepartment of Psychology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7669-426X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To survive and thrive, animals must navigate risk by anticipating and avoiding potential losses while approaching potential gains. Although researchers have leveraged neuroimaging to predict risky choices in humans, consensus on unitary versus distinct underlying neural and psychological mechanisms remains elusive. Across four functional magnetic resonance imaging studies (combined

Indexed as

accumbenshumaninsulaneuroeconomicsrisk

Identifiers

PMID40625401
PMCPMC12230699

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.