Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42719771›Full record

ArticleImaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)2026

Clarifying and extending permutation tests on brain map correspondence through mixed-effects modeling.

Qiaochu Wang, Lingyi Peng, Thomas E Nichols, Xu Zou, Yaotian Wang, Jie He, Yuexin Zhang, Dana L Tudorascu, Diego Szczupak, Lauren Schaeffer and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.), 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

16 authors.

Qiaochu WangDepartment of Statistics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-7426-6643
Lingyi PengDepartment of Biostatistics and Health Data Science, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.
Thomas E NicholsOxford Big Data Institute, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4516-5103
Xu ZouDepartment of Statistics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-3408-5862
Yaotian WangDepartment of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States.
Jie HeDepartment of Statistics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-1148-8085
Yuexin ZhangDepartment of Statistics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-5197-8765
Dana L TudorascuDepartment of Biostatistics and Health Data Science, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.
Diego SzczupakDepartment of Neurobiology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0818-9613
Lauren SchaefferDepartment of Neurobiology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.
Emily S RothwellDepartment of Neurobiology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7791-2695
Laurel DieckhausDepartment of Neurobiology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5554-1467
Stacey J Sukoff RizzoDepartment of Neurobiology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1460-8127
Gregory W CarterThe Jackson Laboratory, Bar Harbor, ME, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2834-8186
Afonso C SilvaDepartment of Neurobiology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6105-7567
Tingting ZhangDepartment of Statistics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7895-8070

Funding

Vascular Moderators of the Impact of Alzheimer's Pathology in the Young-OldP01AG025204 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI Milos D Ikonomovic · 2005 to 2026
$56.5M
Veterinary and Colony Management CoreU19AG074866 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI Gregg E. Homanics · 2022 to 2026
$44.9M
Mapping the Human Connectome: Structure, Function, and HeritabilityU54MH091657 · NIMH · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI UGURBIL, KAMIL, VAN ESSEN, DAVID C · 2010 to 2014
$34.7M
Statistical methods to improve reproducibility and reduce technical variability in heterogeneous multimodal neuroimaging studies of Alzheimer’s DiseaseR01AG063752 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI TUDORASCU, DANA L · 2019 to 2023
$3.0M
High-Throughput Computing for Genomics and Bioinformatics ResearchS10OD028483 · OD · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI LEE, ADRIAN V · 2021 to 2021
$574k
NIA NIH HHS P01 AG025204NIA NIH HHS R01 AG063752NIA NIH HHS U19 AG074866NIH HHS S10 OD028483NIMH NIH HHS U54 MH091657
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Permutation-based methods such as the spin test, Brain Surrogate Maps with Autocorrelated Spatial Heterogeneity (BrainSMASH), and the simple permutation-based intermodal correspondence (SPICE) test are widely used to assess correspondence between brain maps while accounting for their spatial autocorrelation. However, these methods define and evaluate correspondence in fundamentally different ways, making their results difficult to compare or interpret jointly. We address these limitations by introducing a two-factor mixed-effects model that decomposes brain map variability into components arising from inter-subject variability and spatial variability across brain locations. This formulation provides a principled way to characterize distinct sources of variability in brain maps and to formally link each correspondence test to the specific component it targets. Within this framework, we further provide the analytical expressions of the null distributions of the spin test, BrainSMASH, and SPICE in terms of model parameters. This unified framework clarifies the fundamental distinctions among the permutation tests, reveals their implicit assumptions, and provides a principled way to compare and interpret their results. Beyond clarifying existing methods, the modeling framework naturally motivates a bootstrap-based method that enables simultaneous inference of multiple forms of correspondence arising from different components of brain map variability. Through extensive simulations and empirical analyses of both structural (cortical thickness vs. sulcal depth) and functional (language vs. motor contrast) brain maps, we demonstrate that the bootstrap-based method achieves well-calibrated type I error, substantially higher statistical power, and provides a robust and comprehensive characterization of different forms of brain map correspondence.

Indexed as

BrainBrain MappingImage Processing, Computer-AssistedComputer SimulationHumansMagnetic Resonance Imagingbootstrappingbrain map correspondencemixed-effects modelspermutation tests

Identifiers

PMID42719771
PMCPMC13556793

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.