SynthesisFrontiers in human neuroscience2025
Which software packages did researchers use to meta-analyze fMRI data? A literature survey from 2019 to 2024.
Synthesis in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 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.
- Peaks2Image: Reconstructing fMRI maps from stereotactic coordinates to enhance cognitive meta-analysis.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2026Article
- CBMR: Coordinate-based meta-regression for group and covariate inference.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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: There are various methods available for conducting meta-analyses of fMRI data, with coordinate-based meta-analysis (CBMA) being a frequently used approach due to the limited availability of effect size and statistical maps. Since the literature has accumulated many fMRI meta-analyses, several reports have been published to reveal the prevalence of numerous meta-analytic software packages without investigating into the recency of their versions used. To address this gap, a literature survey was conducted to identify the software packages and version numbers used for fMRI meta-analyses published between 2019 and 2024. Methods: The online databases of Web of Science Core Collection (WOSCC) and Scopus were queried to identify relevant papers. After screening, the analysis consisted of data manually extracted from 820 papers. Results: The most frequently used software was GingerALE (407 out of 820 papers, 49.6%), followed by SDM-PSI (27.4%) and Neurosynth (11.0%). Overall, 540 papers (65.9%) fully disclosed the names and version numbers of the software packages used in their analyses, whereas 19 papers (2.3%) reported neither the names nor the version numbers. For GingerALE, the most frequently used versions were 2.3.6 and 3.0.2, but it should be noted that versions prior to 2.3.6 have an issue of inflated false positive rates. For SDM-PSI, the most frequently used versions were 5.141, 5.15, 6.21, and 6.22, but the meta-analytic method adopted for version 6 differs from those used in prior versions. Discussion: To ensure transparency and reproducibility in research, researchers should clearly report the name and version number of software package used.
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.