Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40835837›Full record

ReviewNature communications2025

Current challenges and future directions for brain age prediction in children and adolescents.

Lucy Whitmore, Dani Beck

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nature communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. The Brain Age Gap as a Predictor of Alcohol Initiation in Adolescence.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

2 authors.

Lucy WhitmoreDepartment of Psychology, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, USA.
Dani BeckDepartment of Psychology, PROMENTA Research Center, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. dani.beck@psykologi.uio.no.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0974-9304

Funding

Ministry of Health and Care Services | Helse Sør-Øst RHF (Southern and Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority) 2021070Norges Forskningsråd (Research Council of Norway) 288083Norges Forskningsråd (Research Council of Norway) 323951
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Advancements in computational techniques have enhanced our understanding of human brain development, particularly through high-dimensional data from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). One notable approach is the brain-age prediction framework, which predicts biological age from neuroimaging data and calculates the brain age gap (BAG), a marker of deviation from chronological age. Most commonly applied to adult samples, this approach is now increasingly used in children and adolescents. However, several considerations must be taken into account when applying brain-age prediction in youth. In this Perspective, we outline important challenges and provide recommendations for researchers as well as future directions for the field.

Indexed as

AgingBrainAdolescentChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleNeuroimaging

Identifiers

PMID40835837
PMCPMC12368027

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.