The DOI matches its Crossref record; 80 of the 80 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Evaluating the consistency and specificity of neuroimaging data using meta-analysis
Open accessAbstract
Making sense of a neuroimaging literature that is growing in scope and complexity will require increasingly sophisticated tools for synthesizing findings across studies. Meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies fills a unique niche in this process: It can be used to evaluate the consistency of findings across different laboratories and task variants, and it can be used to evaluate the specificity of findings in brain regions or networks to particular task types. This review discusses examples, implementation, and considerations when choosing meta-analytic techniques. It focuses on the multilevel kernel density analysis (MKDA) framework, which has been used in recent studies to evaluate consistency and specificity of regional activation, identify distributed functional networks from patterns of co-activation, and test hypotheses about functional cortical-subcortical pathways in healthy individuals and patients with mental disorders. Several tests of consistency and specificity are described.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“For working memory, the forward inference map revealed the most consistent associations in dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), anterior insula and dorsal medial frontal cortex (MFC), replicating previous findings15,20.”
From Large-scale automated synthesis of human functional neuroimaging data. (2011) · cites this paper as [15]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“True reverse inference requires knowledge of which brain regions and networks are selectively, and not just consistently, associated with particular cognitive states15,17.”
From Large-scale automated synthesis of human functional neuroimaging data. (2011) · cites this paper as [15]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Comparison of automated meta-analyses of three broad psychological terms (‘working memory’, ‘emotion’, and ‘pain’) with previously published meta- or mega-analytic maps14-16 revealed a marked convergence between approaches both qualitatively (Fig. 2) and quantitatively (Supplementary Fig. 5).”
From Large-scale automated synthesis of human functional neuroimaging data. (2011) · cites this paper as [15]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test
Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629 · Cited by 56,722
Meta-analysis in clinical trials
DerSimonian, R., & Laird, N. (1986) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2 · Cited by 39,552
(2001) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511546396 · Cited by 4,482
A new SPM toolbox for combining probabilistic cytoarchitectonic maps and functional imaging data
Eickhoff, S. B., Stephan, K. E., Mohlberg, H., Grefkes, C., Fink, G. R., Amunts, K., & Zilles, K. (2005) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.12.034 · Cited by 4,033
Functional neuroanatomy of emotion: A meta-analysis of emotion activation studies in PET and fMRI
Phan, K. L., Wager, T., Taylor, S. F., & Liberzon, I. (2002) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1006/nimg.2002.1087 · Cited by 3,502
Self-citationEtkin, A., & Wager, T. D. (2007) · American Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.2007.07030504 · Cited by 3,391 · cited 2×
“7 of the brain (Flandin et al., 2002; Thirion et al., 2006), or the 7 establishment of groups of contiguous voxels that show similar”
BackgroundSelf-citationFixed-and random-effects models in meta-analysis.
Hedges, L. V., & Vevea, J. L. (1998) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.3.4.486 · Cited by 2,977
Self-referential processing in our brain—A meta-analysis of imaging studies on the self
Northoff, G., Heinzel, A., de Greck, M., Bermpohl, F., Dobrowolny, H., & Panksepp, J. (2006) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.12.002 · Cited by 2,792
Nonparametric Statistical Inference
(2012) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/springerreference_205502 · Cited by 2,398
Can cognitive processes be inferred from neuroimaging data?
POLDRACK, R. (2006) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2005.12.004 · Cited by 2,249
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Large-scale automated synthesis of human functional neuroimaging data.
Yarkoni, T., Poldrack, R. A., Nichols, T. E., Van Essen, D. C., & Wager, T. D. (2011) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/nmeth.1635 · Cited by 3,686
“Comparison of automated meta-analyses of three broad psychological terms ('working memory', 'emotion' and 'pain') with previously published meta- or mega-analytic map”
Self-citationThayer, J. F., Åhs, F., Fredrikson, M., Sollers, J. J., & Wager, T. D. (2012) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2011.11.009 · Cited by 3,224
Self-citationDysfunction of the prefrontal cortex in addiction: neuroimaging findings and clinical implications
Goldstein, R. Z., & Volkow, N. D. (2011) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn3119 · Cited by 2,749
Kaiser, R. H., Andrews-Hanna, J. R., Wager, T. D., & Pizzagalli, D. A. (2015) · JAMA Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2015.0071 · Cited by 2,281
Self-citationBartra, O., McGuire, J. T., & Kable, J. W. (2013) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.02.063 · Cited by 1,927
Metadata
- Authors
- Wager, T. D., Lindquist, M. A., Nichols, T. E., Kober, H., & Van Snellenberg, J. X.
- Affiliations
- Columbia University (US)
- GlaxoSmithKline (United Kingdom) (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Wager, Tor D.
- Venue
- NeuroImage
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2009-03
- Volume
- 45
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- S210-S221
- ISSN
- 1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC3318962
- OpenAlex
- W2141058981
- Cited by
- 242
- References
- 80
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 18
- FWCI
- 0.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH076136)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
- Keywords
- regional brain activation, functional brain networks, CO activation, mental illness
- MeSH terms
- Brain, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Sensitivity and Specificity, Meta-Analysis as Topic, Positron-Emission Tomography
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
