ArticleImaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)2025
Predictive modeling of significance thresholding in activation likelihood estimation meta-analysis.
Article in Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Activation Likelihood Estimation (ALE) employs voxel- or cluster-level family-wise error (vFWE or cFWE) correction or threshold-free cluster enhancement (TFCE) to counter false positives due to multiple comparisons. These corrections utilize Monte-Carlo simulations to approximate a null distribution of spatial convergence, which allows for the determination of a corrected significance threshold. The simulations may take many hours depending on the dataset and the hardware used to run the computations. In this study, we aimed to replace the time-consuming Monte-Carlo simulation procedure with an instantaneous machine-learning prediction based on features of the meta-analysis dataset. These features were created from the number of experiments in the dataset, the number of subjects per experiment, and the number of foci reported per experiment. We simulated 68,100 training datasets, containing between 10 and 150 experiments and computed the vFWE, cFWE, and TFCE significance thresholds. We then used this data to train one XGBoost regression model for each thresholding technique. Lastly, we validated the performance of the three models using 11 independent real-life datasets (21 contrasts) from previously published ALE meta-analyses. The vFWE model reached near-perfect prediction levels (R² = 0.996), while the TFCE and cFWE models achieved very good prediction accuracies of R² = 0.951 and R² = 0.938, respectively. This means that, on average, the difference between predicted and standard (monte-carlo based) cFWE thresholds was less than two voxels. Given that our model predicts significance thresholds in ALE meta-analyses with very high accuracy, we advocate our efficient prediction approach as a replacement for the currently used Monte-Carlo simulations in future ALE analyses. This will save hours of computation time and reduce energy consumption. Furthermore, the reduced compute time allows for easier implementation of multi-analysis set-ups like leave-one-out sensitivity analysis or subsampling.
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.