2011
DOI: 10.1186/1756-0500-4-349
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The BrainMap strategy for standardization, sharing, and meta-analysis of neuroimaging data

Abstract: BackgroundNeuroimaging researchers have developed rigorous community data and metadata standards that encourage meta-analysis as a method for establishing robust and meaningful convergence of knowledge of human brain structure and function. Capitalizing on these standards, the BrainMap project offers databases, software applications, and other associated tools for supporting and promoting quantitative coordinate-based meta-analysis of the structural and functional neuroimaging literature.FindingsIn this report… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
196
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 195 publications
(196 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
(52 reference statements)
0
196
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Secondly, task-based functional connectivity using meta-analytic co-activation modelling (MACM) has been established as another functional connectivity approach (Eickhoff et al, 2010; Laird et al, 2013). Here, co-activation of regions with a certain seed region across many experiments recorded in the BrainMap database (Fox and Lancaster, 2002; Laird et al, 2011, 2009, 2005) is used to identify functional networks. Furthermore, the meta-data specifying the kind of task and contrast employed by experiments activating the region of interest may be used to functionally characterize the resulting networks and thus reveal their functional implication.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Secondly, task-based functional connectivity using meta-analytic co-activation modelling (MACM) has been established as another functional connectivity approach (Eickhoff et al, 2010; Laird et al, 2013). Here, co-activation of regions with a certain seed region across many experiments recorded in the BrainMap database (Fox and Lancaster, 2002; Laird et al, 2011, 2009, 2005) is used to identify functional networks. Furthermore, the meta-data specifying the kind of task and contrast employed by experiments activating the region of interest may be used to functionally characterize the resulting networks and thus reveal their functional implication.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently, we identified five functional subregions within the right dorsal PM (PMd) by multi-modal connectivity-based parcellation (CBP) based on co-activations of right PMd voxels during thousands of activation (task-based fMRI and PET) studies. In order to characterize the delineated functional parcels of the right PMd in terms of associated behavioral functions, we examined hundreds of activation studies reporting activation peaks in the right PMd parcels using quantitative forward and reverse inferences based on the BrainMap (Laird et al 2011) database (Genon et al 2016a). As illustrated in Figure 1, this approach revealed a clear cognitive-motor gradient in terms of recruitment by fMRI tasks along the rostro-caudal axis.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Meanwhile, there would be numerous benefits that can be derived from semantically integrated data for various endeavors. Specifically, trials of new treatments for stroke require imaging data as part of the patient assessment (Wintermark et al, 2013), but the sample size needs to be large enough to obtain reliable results, particularly where treatment effects are likely to be modest (Lindley et al, 2015): the ability to combine image as well as clinical data facilitates meta-analyses (Laird et al, 2011). Furthermore, a semantically integrated patient database could be an efficient and cost-effective way to obtain data from many different centers and many different countries in order to obtain the sample size required to be able to observe a statistically significant difference between the subtypes of stroke and other key clinical variables or treatment effects in observational studies or clinical trials (Poldrack and Gorgolewski, 2014).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%