Extracting Weight of Evidence from

Tommaso Costa, Jordi Manuello, Franco Cauda, Annachiara Crocetta, Donato Liloia

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in Brain sciences, 2026. 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

5 authors.

Tommaso CostaGCS-fMRI Group, Koelliker Hospital and Department of Psychology, University of Turin, 10124 Turin, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-0822-862X

Jordi ManuelloGCS-fMRI Group, Koelliker Hospital and Department of Psychology, University of Turin, 10124 Turin, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9928-0924

Franco CaudaGCS-fMRI Group, Koelliker Hospital and Department of Psychology, University of Turin, 10124 Turin, Italy.

Annachiara CrocettaGCS-fMRI Group, Koelliker Hospital and Department of Psychology, University of Turin, 10124 Turin, Italy.ORCID 0009-0001-3408-7322

Donato LiloiaGCS-fMRI Group, Koelliker Hospital and Department of Psychology, University of Turin, 10124 Turin, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9481-8510

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background

methodsIn this work, we present a practical approach that transforms

resultsThe results show that effects traditionally classified as statistically significant using the canonical Activation Likelihood Estimation framework actually span a wide range of evidential strengths, with Bayes factor bounds varying approximately from 46 to 410. This finding reveals substantial heterogeneity in weight of evidence that is concealed by conventional threshold-based inference.

conclusionBy enabling the construction of voxel-wise maps of evidential strength while remaining fully compatible with existing analysis pipelines, the proposed approach helps to avoid common misinterpretations of

Indexed as

Activation Likelihood EstimationBayes factorp-valueweight of evidence

Identifiers

PMID41594808

DOI10.3390/brainsci16010087

PMCPMC12838691

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.