» Articles » PMID: 15846810

BrainMap Taxonomy of Experimental Design: Description and Evaluation

Overview
Journal Hum Brain Mapp
Publisher Wiley
Specialty Neurology
Date 2005 Apr 23
PMID 15846810
Citations 159
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Coordinate-based, voxel-wise meta-analysis is an exciting recent addition to the human functional brain mapping literature. In view of the critical importance of selection criteria for any valid meta-analysis, a taxonomy of experimental design should be an important tool for aiding in the design of rigorous meta-analyses. The coding scheme of experimental designs developed for and implemented within the BrainMap database provides a candidate taxonomy. In this study, the BrainMap experimental-design taxonomy is described and evaluated by comparing taxonomy fields to data-filtering choices made by subject-matter experts carrying out meta-analyses of the functional imaging literature. Fifteen publications reporting a total of 46 voxel-wise meta-analyses were included in this assessment. Collectively these 46 meta-analyses pooled data from 351 publications, selected for experimental similarity within each meta-analysis. Filter implementations within BrainMap were graded by ease-of-use (A-C) and by stage-of-use (1-3). Quality filters and content filters were tabulated separately. Quality filters required for data entry into BrainMap were classed as mandatory (five filters), being above the use grading system. All authors spontaneously adopted the five mandatory filters in constructing their meta-analysis, indicating excellent agreement on data quality among authors and between authors and the BrainMap development team. Two non-mandatory quality filters (group size and imaging modality) were applied by all authors; both were Stage 1, Grade A filters. Field-of-view filters were the least-accessible quality filters (Stage 3, Grade C); two field-of-view filters were applied by six and four authors, respectively. Authors made a total of 115 content-filter choices. Of these, 78 (68%) were Stage 1, Grade A filters; 16 (14%) were Stage 2, Grade A; and 21 (18%) were Stage 2, Grade C. No author-applied filter was absent from the taxonomy.

Citing Articles

GINNA, a 33 resting-state networks atlas with meta-analytic decoding-based cognitive characterization.

Gillig A, Cremona S, Zago L, Mellet E, Thiebaut de Schotten M, Joliot M Commun Biol. 2025; 8(1):253.

PMID: 39966659 PMC: 11836461. DOI: 10.1038/s42003-025-07671-2.


Understanding gender differences in reasoning and specific paradigm using meta-analysis of neuroimaging.

Chen L, Zheng Z, Liang J, Lin Y, Miao Q Front Behav Neurosci. 2025; 18():1457663.

PMID: 39839537 PMC: 11747635. DOI: 10.3389/fnbeh.2024.1457663.


Meta-analytic connectivity perturbation analysis (MACPA): a new method for enhanced precision in fMRI connectivity analysis.

Cauda F, Manuello J, Crocetta A, Duca S, Costa T, Liloia D Brain Struct Funct. 2024; 230(1):17.

PMID: 39718568 DOI: 10.1007/s00429-024-02867-4.


Convergent functional effects of antidepressants in major depressive disorder: a neuroimaging meta-analysis.

Saberi A, Ebneabbasi A, Rahimi S, Sarebannejad S, Sen Z, Graf H Mol Psychiatry. 2024; 30(2):736-751.

PMID: 39406999 PMC: 11746144. DOI: 10.1038/s41380-024-02780-6.


Functional brain connectivity changes associated with day-to-day fluctuations in affective states.

Racicot J, Smine S, Afzali K, Orban P Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2024; 24(6):1141-1154.

PMID: 39322824 PMC: 11525411. DOI: 10.3758/s13415-024-01216-6.


References
1.
Lancaster J, Woldorff M, Parsons L, Liotti M, Freitas C, Rainey L . Automated Talairach atlas labels for functional brain mapping. Hum Brain Mapp. 2000; 10(3):120-31. PMC: 6871915. DOI: 10.1002/1097-0193(200007)10:3<120::aid-hbm30>3.0.co;2-8. View

2.
Laird A, Lancaster J, Fox P . BrainMap: the social evolution of a human brain mapping database. Neuroinformatics. 2005; 3(1):65-78. DOI: 10.1385/ni:3:1:065. View

3.
Fox P, Parsons L, Lancaster J . Beyond the single study: function/location metanalysis in cognitive neuroimaging. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 1998; 8(2):178-87. DOI: 10.1016/s0959-4388(98)80138-4. View

4.
Wager T, Jonides J, Reading S . Neuroimaging studies of shifting attention: a meta-analysis. Neuroimage. 2004; 22(4):1679-93. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.03.052. View

5.
Laird A, McMillan K, Lancaster J, Kochunov P, Turkeltaub P, Pardo J . A comparison of label-based review and ALE meta-analysis in the Stroop task. Hum Brain Mapp. 2005; 25(1):6-21. PMC: 6871676. DOI: 10.1002/hbm.20129. View