ArticleHuman brain mapping2026
Evaluation of a New Paracingulate Sulcus Identification and Measurement Protocol.
Article in Human brain mapping, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Asymmetric Cingulum Bundle Connectivity Is Modulated by Paracingulate Sulcus Morphology.Human brain mapping · 2025Article
- Towards Deciphering the Fetal Foundation of Normal Cognition and Cognitive Symptoms From Sulcation of the Cortex.Frontiers in neuroanatomy · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The folding pattern of the anterior cingulate cortex is variable among individuals. The paracingulate sulcus (PCS), in particular, can be difficult to identify because of this variability. In this paper, we assessed the benefits of a new protocol to identify the PCS and measure its length using 3D reconstructions of the brain obtained through the BrainVISA software. Both the previous state-of-the-art protocol and the new protocol were applied to identify the PCS in subjects from a UK cohort (n = 50), with the length of the PCS computed automatically by BrainVISA after PCS identification. We assessed inter-rater reliability for PCS length under both protocols and the correlation of PCS length values output by the two protocols. Inspection of the results indicated an advantage of the new protocol as there are 8 out of 100 hemispheres in which the old protocol detects a PCS due to the mislabelling of the intra-limbic sulcus as the cingulate sulcus and the new protocol does not. This advantage is conferred by the incorporation of identification of the intra-limbic sulcus (when present) in the new protocol. For instances where the protocols agreed on the presence of a PCS, the new protocol for PCS length obtained intra-class correlations of 0.85 and 0.86 on respectively untrained and trained experimenters, compared to 0.81 when trained experimenters used the previous protocol. The PCS length correlation between both protocols was 0.73 for the entire sample and 0.85 after excluding instances where the protocols disagreed on the presence of a PCS. These findings suggest that taking into account the intra-limbic sulcus and taking advantage of 3D sulcal visualisation may help improve reliable PCS identification, and that the new protocol is a reliable tool that is likely to prove useful in research into cingulate and paracingulate cortical folding.
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.