ArticleImaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)2025
Neural subnetwork signatures distinguishing source and item memory retrieval: A meta-analysis of 66 fMRI studies.
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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Mapping EEG Metrics to Human Affective and Cognitive Models: An Interdisciplinary Scoping Review from a Cognitive Neuroscience Perspective.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.