Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40800465›Full record

ArticleImaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)2024

Integrating anatomical and functional landmarks for interparticipant alignment of imaging data.

Jayson Jeganathan, Bryan Paton, Nikitas Koussis, Michael Breakspear

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Jayson JeganathanSchool of Psychological Sciences, College of Engineering, Science and Environment, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, Australia.
Bryan PatonSchool of Psychological Sciences, College of Engineering, Science and Environment, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, Australia.
Nikitas KoussisSchool of Psychological Sciences, College of Engineering, Science and Environment, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, Australia.
Michael BreakspearSchool of Psychological Sciences, College of Engineering, Science and Environment, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aligning brain maps using functional features rather than anatomical landmarks potentially improves individual identifiability and increases power in group neuroimaging studies. However, alignment based purely on functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) risks omitting useful anatomical constraints. An optimized combination of anatomical and functional feature alignment could balance the advantages of each approach. We used 3T fMRI data from 80 Human Connectome Project participants during seven tasks. The effectiveness of functional and anatomical alignment methods was evaluated using interparticipant decoding accuracy. Functional alignment mapped vertices from participants to a template, aligning their fMRI responses to shared responses during movie viewing. The template was derived from the combined fMRI responses of a set of participants. We benchmarked the results against existing functional alignment methods, including the Procrustes method and ridge regression. A common practice in the field is to use the same participants for the alignment cohort and for template generation. We found that this inflates decoding accuracies by mixing anatomical and functional alignment. Based on this, we recommend that a template's generalizability should be evaluated against held-out participants. Building on these findings, we investigated whether inter-subject alignment could be improved by integrating anatomical and functional information. We studied a modified alignment method where a single parameter interpolates between pure functional alignment and anatomical alignment. Optimizing the parameter with nested cross-validation, we found that integrating anatomical and functional information robustly reduced noise and improved alignment across a variety of alignment methods. Combining anatomical and functional information accounts for individual heterogeneity in functional topographies while incorporating anatomical constraints. The integrated alignment described here improves inter-subject decoding using functional brain maps. These findings also demonstrate that brain anatomy provides a lens into the inherent variability of individual neural landscapes.

Indexed as

decodingfunctional alignmenthyperalignment

Identifiers

PMID40800465
PMCPMC12272198

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.