Is the Statistic Value All We Should Care about in Neuroimaging?

BioRxiv : the Preprint Server for Biology
Gang ChenRobert W Cox


Here we address an important issue that has been embedded within the neuroimaging community for a long time: the absence of effect estimates in results reporting in the literature. The statistic value itself, as a dimensionless measure, does not provide information on the biophysical interpretation of a study, and it certainly does not represent the whole picture of a study. Unfortunately, in contrast to standard practice in most scientific fields, effect (or amplitude) estimates are usually not provided in most results reporting in the current neuroimaging publications and presentations. Possible reasons underlying this general trend include: 1) lack of general awareness, 2) software limitations, 3) inaccurate estimation of the BOLD response, and 4) poor modeling due to our relatively limited understanding of FMRI signal components. However, as we discuss here, such reporting damages the reliability and interpretability of the scientific findings themselves, and there is in fact no overwhelming reason for such a practice to persist. In order to promote meaningful interpretation, cross validation, reproducibility, meta and power analyses in neuroimaging, we strongly suggest that, as part of good scientific practice, effect esti...Continue Reading

Related Concepts

Computer Software
Cross Validation
Meta Analysis (Statistical Procedure)
Blood Oxygen Level Dependant Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Related Feeds

BioRxiv & MedRxiv Preprints

BioRxiv and MedRxiv are the preprint servers for biology and health sciences respectively, operated by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory. Here are the latest preprint articles (which are not peer-reviewed) from BioRxiv and MedRxiv.

Related Papers

Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology
R Turner
Journal of the National Medical Association
Vickie L Shavers
British Dental Journal
V R Firmstone
© 2021 Meta ULC. All rights reserved