Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40860579›Full record

ArticleImaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)2025

Neural subnetwork signatures distinguishing source and item memory retrieval: A meta-analysis of 66 fMRI studies.

Hongkeun Kim

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

1 author.

Hongkeun KimDepartment of Rehabilitation Psychology, Daegu University, Gyeongsan-si, Gyeongsangbuk-do, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2713-6197

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This meta-analysis of 66 functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies investigated neural subnetworks underlying source versus item memory retrieval, emphasizing functional distinctions within major intrinsic brain networks. Results revealed clear differences in subnetwork activation patterns between the two retrieval types. Within the Frontoparietal Network, Subnetwork A exhibited stronger activation during source retrieval, highlighting its key role in managing cognitive control processes necessary for complex memory tasks; in contrast, Subnetworks B and C showed minimal or no task-specific engagement. Conversely, within the Default Mode Network, Subnetworks A and B were selectively activated during item memory retrieval, suggesting their contribution to the increased subjective vividness characteristic of simpler recollective experiences, while Subnetwork C remained inactive across both retrieval conditions. Lastly, within the Ventral Attention Network, Subnetwork B-but not Subnetwork A-was more active during source than item memory retrieval, possibly reflecting its specific role in coordinating neural activity under the heightened demands of complex retrieval. Together, these findings advance understanding of subnetwork-specific roles in episodic memory retrieval and highlight the utility of subnetwork-level analyses for uncovering detailed functional specialization within large-scale brain networks.

Indexed as

default mode networkepisodic memoryfMRIfrontoparietal networkmeta-analysissource memory

Identifiers

PMID40860579
PMCPMC12375994

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.