Cited by 406Functional Brain Connectivity StudiesAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsMeta-analysis and systematic reviews

Anisotropic kernels for coordinate-based meta-analyses of neuroimaging studies

Open access
Radua, Joaquim, Rubia, Katya, Canales-Rodríguez, Erick Jorge, Pomarol-Clotet, Edith, Fusar-Poli, Paolo, Mataix-Cols, David·2014·Frontiers in Psychiatry

Abstract

Peak-based meta-analyses of neuroimaging studies create, for each study, a brain map of effect size or peak likelihood by convolving a kernel with each reported peak. A kernel is a small matrix applied in order that voxels surrounding the peak have a value similar to, but slightly lower than that of the peak. Current kernels are isotropic, i.e., the value of a voxel close to a peak only depends on the Euclidean distance between the voxel and the peak. However, such perfect spheres of effect size or likelihood around the peak are rather implausible: a voxel that correlates with the peak across individuals is more likely to be part of the cluster of significant activation or difference than voxels uncorrelated with the peak. This paper introduces anisotropic kernels, which assign different values to the different neighboring voxels based on the spatial correlation between them. They are specifically developed for effect-size signed differential mapping (ES-SDM), though might be easily implemented in other meta-analysis packages such as activation likelihood estimation (ALE). The paper also describes the creation of the required correlation templates for gray matter/BOLD response, white matter, cerebrospinal fluid, and fractional anisotropy. Finally, the new method is validated by quantifying the accuracy of the recreation of effect size maps from peak information. This empirical validation showed that the optimal degree of anisotropy and full-width at half-maximum (FWHM) might vary largely depending on the specific data meta-analyzed. However, it also showed that the recreation substantially improved and did not depend on the FWHM when full anisotropy was used. Based on these results, we recommend the use of fully anisotropic kernels in ES-SDM and ALE, unless optimal meta-analysis-specific parameters can be estimated based on the recreation of available statistical maps. The new method and templates are freely available at http://www.sdmproject.com/.

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 · 10.3389/fpsyt.2014.00013

Cites

34 of 34 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?

  • The analysis method used is improved and has various strengths compared to other neuroimaging meta-analytical techniques.

    “we used an improved analysis method which has various strengths compared to other neuroimaging meta-analytical techniques (Radua et al., 2014)”
  • AES-SDM has been validated and used in several structural and functional fMRI studies.

    “This method, which has been validated and used in several structural and functional fMRI studies creates a brain map of the effect size of the difference between the two conditions (CS+ and CS -)for each study (either from SPMs or from peak information) and afterwards conducts a voxel-wise random-effects meta-analysis (weighting the studies for sample size and variance) 13,[20][21][22]”

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

1 of the 35 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Radua, J., Rubia, K., Canales-Rodríguez, E. J., Pomarol-Clotet, E., Fusar-Poli, P., & Mataix-Cols, D.
Affiliations
  • King's College London (GB)
  • Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Salud Mental (ES)
Venue
Frontiers in Psychiatry
Published
2014
Volume
5
Pages
13-13
ISSN
1664-0640 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2017727635
Cited by
406
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 35 · 2025: 41 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 47 · 2021: 44 · 2020: 33 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 36 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 27 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 3
FWCI
12.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
Keywords
anisotropic kernels, coordinate-based meta-analysis, activation likelihood estimation, BOLD signal, white matter, cerebrospinal fluid, fractional anisotropy, full width at half maximum, neuroimaging meta-analysis

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