ArticleImaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)
Task-invariant networks interfere with and task-specific networks support memory formation: An fMRI meta-analysis.
Article in Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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
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
Why do some moments imprint themselves in memory while others vanish without a trace? This meta-analysis identifies a dissociation in large-scale brain networks during encoding: networks associated with impairing encoding are task-invariant, whereas those supporting it are task-specific. Drawing on 56 functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies employing the subsequent memory paradigm, the analysis contrasted neural activity for later-remembered versus later-forgotten trials across verbal and pictorial tasks. Using Yeo et al.'s 17-network parcellation, the results show that encoding-impairing effects consistently recruit specific subsystems within the default mode, frontoparietal, and ventral attention networks-a pattern consistent with distraction or mind-wandering. Conversely, encoding-supporting effects diverge by task: verbal encoding engages language-related networks, whereas pictorial encoding activates visuo-perceptual systems. This asymmetry suggests that encoding failure may arise from similar attentional lapses across contexts, whereas successful encoding requires precise, context-sensitive neural engagement. Taken together, these findings provide a network-level perspective on how the brain shifts between states conducive to remembering and states conducive to forgetting.
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.