ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2026
A practical framework for large-scale neuroimaging data collection in clinically diverse populations: experience from the Stanford Brain Stimulation Lab.
Article in Frontiers in 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
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Novel neuroimaging technologies and data science techniques have allowed for large-scale applications of neuroimaging acquisition in clinical research, particularly within the fields of interventional psychiatry, neuropsychiatry, and precision medicine. These developments have enhanced our understanding of psychiatric and neurological disorders and highlight the need for optimized protocols that support scalable, high-quality neuroimaging data acquisition. This paper aims to describe a protocol for systematic MRI data collection in clinical trials, including details for subject recruitment, meticulous equipment calibration, rigorous real-time quality control of imaging data, standardized documentation (SOP, hardware and software logs), consent workflows, and personnel training. While existing MRI review papers largely focus on analytical methods, safety protocols, and results of large consortium efforts, few publications detail specific operational protocols of MRI data collection that allow for consistent, high-impact neuroimaging research including participant recruitment, staff training, and practical scanning considerations. The operational protocols presented here are designed to facilitate reproducible, high-quality neuroimaging acquisition across clinically diverse populations, with a particular focus on functional MRI. Importantly, many of the recommendations described are grounded in practical experience rather than prescriptive guidelines alone. They represent lessons learned through years of iterative refinement, troubleshooting, and trial-and-error while conducting thousands of MRI scans in clinical research settings. By sharing these operational insights, we hope to provide researchers with practical strategies that can reduce common challenges and accelerate the development of robust neuroimaging workflows.
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.