Cited by 25Functional Brain Connectivity StudiesAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications

Precision functional mapping of the subcortex and cerebellum

Open access
Marek, Scott, Greene, Deanna J·2021·Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences

Abstract

Human functional brain networks can be reliably characterized within individuals using precision functional mapping. This approach entails the collection of large quantities of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data from each individual subject. Studies employing precision functional mapping in the cerebral cortex have found that individuals manifest unique representations of functional brain networks around a central tendency described by previous group average approaches. We recently extended precision functional mapping to the subcortex and cerebellum, which has revealed several novel organizational principles within these structures. Here, we detail these principles and provide insights into how precision functional mapping of subcortical structures and the cerebellum may become clinically translatable.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cobeha.2020.12.011

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • By collectively building a global model for the prediction of brain age, the FL paradigm in the neuroimaging domain works effectively.

    “By collectively building a global model for the prediction of brain age, the FL paradigm in the neuroimaging domain works effectively.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Marek, S., & Greene, D. J.
Affiliations
University of California San Diego (US)
Corresponding author
Greene, Deanna J
Venue
Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-08
Volume
40
Pages
12-18
ISSN
2352-1546 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3128335317
Cited by
25
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1
FWCI
0.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Keywords
cerebellum, functional brain networks, individual differences, clinical translation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review