ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2026
EBA-related body-preferring responses in the occipitotemporal cortex measured with functional near-infrared spectroscopy.
Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The extrastriate body area (EBA) is involved in the visual processing of bodies and body parts, but most evidence for its response profile comes from fMRI. We examined whether fNIRS can detect body-preferring occipitotemporal responses consistent with EBA-related processing. Methods: Sixty university students passively viewed non-hand body parts, hands, and objects. HbO responses were estimated using a block-level general linear model, with the three conditions matched in temporal structure. For each participant, a leave-one-subject-out (LOSO) procedure used the other 59 participants to select left and right functional peak channels within anatomically guided EBA-related occipitotemporal channel pools. This reduced direct participant-level circularity but did not provide dataset-level independence or independently localized EBA ROIs. Preprocessing included linear detrending, temporal derivative distribution repair, and 0.01-0.08-Hz band-pass filtering. An additional ICA preprocessing step with a conservative noise identification threshold was applied to attenuate spatially widespread noise components. Results: In the primary analysis, both the body-object and body-hand contrasts were significant for the left and right LOSO-selected functional peak channels and the bilateral average after FDR correction. Following additional ICA preprocessing, both contrasts remained significant for the left functional peak channel and the bilateral average, but not for the right functional peak channel. Conclusion: Non-hand body parts elicited stronger HbO responses than objects and hands in posterior temporal-occipital cortex. The left-hemisphere and bilateral effects were significant in both analyses, whereas the right-sided effects were significant only in the primary analysis. Although the absence of short-separation measurements precluded complete separation of cortical and extracerebral contributions, the findings support the feasibility of measuring body-preferring occipitotemporal responses consistent with EBA-related processing using fNIRS; they do not establish direct anatomical localization of the EBA.
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.