Neuroimaging results altered by varying analysis pipelines

Lindquist, Martin

doi:10.1038/d41586-020-01282-z

NEWS AND VIEWS
20 May 2020

Neuroimaging results altered by varying analysis pipelines

Seventy laboratories that analysed the same neuroimaging data each produced different results. This finding highlights the potential consequences of a lack of standardized pipelines for processing complex data.

Martin Lindquist ⁰

Martin Lindquist
1. Martin Lindquist is in the Department of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland 21205, USA.
View author publications

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Access through your institution

Buy or subscribe

For most types of big data, from genome sequences to medical images, there is no single ‘best’ way to process the data. This issue is exemplified by the substantial differences in how individual laboratories preprocess and analyse data from functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) experiments, which generate information about brain activity. Indeed, a survey of fMRI studies found that nearly every study used a different analysis pipeline¹. Writing in Nature, Botvinik-Nezer et al.² provide further evidence of this variability, highlighting how analytical choices made by individual researchers can greatly influence the findings gleaned from an fMRI data set. The work is bound to spark lively discussion.

Access options

Access through your institution

Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

$32.00

Buy

All prices are NET prices.

Nature 582, 36-37 (2020)

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-01282-z

References

Carp, J. NeuroImage 63, 289–300 (2012).
PubMed Article Google Scholar
Botvinik-Nezer, R. et al. Nature 582, 84–88 (2020).
Article Google Scholar
Carp, J. Front. Neurosci. 6, 149 (2012).
PubMed Article Google Scholar
Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D. & Simonsohn, U. Psychol. Sci. 22, 1359–1366 (2011).
PubMed Article Google Scholar
Strother, S. C. et al. NeuroImage 15, 747–771 (2002).
PubMed Article Google Scholar
Churchill, N. W. et al. Hum. Brain Mapp. 33, 609–627 (2012).
PubMed Article Google Scholar
Woo, C. W., Chang, L. J., Lindquist, M. A. & Wager, T. D. Nature Neurosci. 20, 365 (2017).
PubMed Article Google Scholar