2008
DOI: 10.1038/nature06976
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

What we can do and what we cannot do with fMRI

Abstract: Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) is currently the mainstay of neuroimaging in cognitive neuroscience. Advances in scanner technology, image acquisition protocols, experimental design, and analysis methods promise to push forward fMRI from mere cartography to the true study of brain organization. However, fundamental questions concerning the interpretation of fMRI data abound, as the conclusions drawn often ignore the actual limitations of the methodology. Here I give an overview of the current stat… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

24
2,054
7
47

Year Published

2009
2009
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2,854 publications
(2,151 citation statements)
references
References 68 publications
24
2,054
7
47
Order By: Relevance
“…Neuroimaging of spontaneous infraslow activity has been the focus of tremendous research interest, but has typically relied upon imaging modalities that indirectly reflect neuronal activity [45][46][47][48] and have thus raised questions about the underlying nature and interpretation of these data 22,36 . Innovative efforts to directly assess the neurophysiological basis of fMRI BOLD signal fluctuations have revealed much about the best electrophysiological correlates of these signals, but these approaches require specialized recording equipment and technical analysis to remove electrical artifacts and are limited in their spatial coverage.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Neuroimaging of spontaneous infraslow activity has been the focus of tremendous research interest, but has typically relied upon imaging modalities that indirectly reflect neuronal activity [45][46][47][48] and have thus raised questions about the underlying nature and interpretation of these data 22,36 . Innovative efforts to directly assess the neurophysiological basis of fMRI BOLD signal fluctuations have revealed much about the best electrophysiological correlates of these signals, but these approaches require specialized recording equipment and technical analysis to remove electrical artifacts and are limited in their spatial coverage.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, alterations in its structure have been linked with neurodegenerative and psychiatric disease [19][20][21] suggesting the potential for the identification of novel biomarkers and a greater understanding of both disease progression and recovery. Because neuroimaging studies of infraslow functional connectivity are dominated by fMRI which reports on a surrogate signal of neuronal activity, blood oxygen level dependent (BOLD) contrast, the interpretation of the underlying neurophysiology is indirect and nuanced 22 , particularly, in light of evidence illustrating instances of dissociation between neuronal activity and hemodynamic responses [23][24][25][26] such as ipsilateral or non-crossed sensory responses where increases in neuronal activity are followed by reductions in blood flow 26 . Furthermore, the temporal resolution of fMRI is limited and questions of the underlying neuronal activity correlate cannot be directly assessed by these means.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These changes arise from local changes in neuronal activity and metabolism. The relationship between BOLD signals and excitatory neuro‐metabolic processes has been studied extensively; however, the relationship between BOLD signals and inhibitory neuro‐metabolic processes is less well understood 3, 4, 5. One of the key inhibitory metabolites is γ‐aminobutyric acid (GABA), which is the main inhibitory neurotransmitter of the brain and is believed to have a direct impact on BOLD contrast through regulation of neuronal firing rates 6, 7, 8.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such a behavior may suggest an interplay between excitatory and inhibitory neurons, which is force‐dependent. Interestingly, inhibition and negative BOLD signal have been observed previously, although not in relation to variable applied GFs [Logothetis, 2008; Logothetis et al, 2001; Newton et al, 2005; Singh, 2012]. …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 86%