Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Neuroimage. 2009 Mar;45(1 Suppl):S210-21. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.10.061. Epub 2008 Nov 20.

Evaluating the consistency and specificity of neuroimaging data using meta-analysis.

Author information

1
Department of Psychology, Columbia University, 1190 Amsterdam Ave, New York, NY 10027, USA. tor@psych.columbia.edu

Abstract

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.

PMID:
19063980
PMCID:
PMC3318962
DOI:
10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.10.061
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center