Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41729967›Full record

ArticleeLife2026

The influence of sample size and covariate distributions on neuroanatomical normative modeling.

Camille Elleaume, Bruno Hebling Vieira, Dorothea L Floris, Nicolas Langer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in eLife, 2026. 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. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Camille ElleaumeMethods of Plasticity Research, Department of Psychology, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-4162-320X
Bruno Hebling VieiraMethods of Plasticity Research, Department of Psychology, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8770-7396
Dorothea L FlorisMethods of Plasticity Research, Department of Psychology, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5838-6821
Nicolas LangerMethods of Plasticity Research, Department of Psychology, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6038-9471

Funding

Dementia Research Synapsis Foundation grant no. 2021-PI02Swiss National Science Foundation 10001C_197480Swiss National Science Foundation 10001C_220048Swiss National Science Foundation IC00I0-227750UZH PostDoc Grant grant no. FK-23-086
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Normative models are increasingly used to characterize individual-level brain deviations in neuroimaging studies, but their performance depends heavily on the reference sample used for training or adaptation. In this study, we systematically investigated how sample size and covariate composition of the reference cohort influence model fit, deviation estimates, and clinical readouts in Alzheimer's disease (AD). Using a discovery dataset (OASIS-3,

Indexed as

Alzheimer DiseaseBrainNeuroimagingAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedSample SizeTransfer Machine LearningUnited KingdomAlzheimer's diseasehumanMRIneurosciencenormative modeling

Identifiers

PMID41729967
PMCPMC12928703

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.