ArticleClinical neuroradiology2025
Subject-specific Functional ROIs Enhance Reliability in Language FMRI.
Article in Clinical neuroradiology, 2025. 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.
- Selectivity for high-level language processing is highly localized in individual brains.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Neural predictors of treatment outcome through emotion regulation in internalizing disorders: a narrative review.Translational psychiatry · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeFunctional MRI can be used to identify individual language-sensitive brain regions in the setting of presurgical diagnostics to improve functional postoperative outcome. In this study, a proven language task was adapted into German and tested with regard to its effectiveness, robustness and reliability in a time frame appropriate for the clinical setting. In addition, two different analysis approaches were compared to address the problem of arbitrary statistical thresholds commonly used in the clinical routine to derive contrast maps.
methodsOn two different days, 24 healthy volunteers were examined in a 3T MRI, whereby the task was run twice in each session. The fMRI included two conditions in a block design, reading of sentences and reading of pronounceable nonword lists. We quantified brain activity by using subject-specific, functionally defined ROIs on the one hand and standardized, anatomically defined ROIs on the other. We then tested, whether the two different analyses indicated robust activation of language-sensitive brain regions, and whether effect sizes were reliable across sessions.
resultsSubject-specific functional ROIs as well as anatomical ROIs led to significant positive effect sizes in the major language sensitive regions of the left hemisphere. However, subject-specific functional ROIs resulted in significantly larger effect sizes and a higher reliability in comparison to anatomical ROIs.
conclusionThe choice of analysis method has a significant impact on the result. For paradigms with short measurement times and little signal change as common in clinical routine, it is highly recommended to use the subject-specific functional ROIs approach.
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.