↓ Skip to main content

Would the field of cognitive neuroscience be advanced by sharing functional MRI data?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, April 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Would the field of cognitive neuroscience be advanced by sharing functional MRI data?
Published in
BMC Medicine, April 2011
DOI 10.1186/1741-7015-9-34
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kristina M Visscher, Daniel H Weissman

Abstract

During the past two decades, the advent of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) has fundamentally changed our understanding of brain-behavior relationships. However, the data from any one study add only incrementally to the big picture. This fact raises important questions about the dominant practice of performing studies in isolation. To what extent are the findings from any single study reproducible? Are researchers who lack the resources to conduct a fMRI study being needlessly excluded? Is pre-existing fMRI data being used effectively to train new students in the field? Here, we will argue that greater sharing and synthesis of raw fMRI data among researchers would make the answers to all of these questions more favorable to scientific discovery than they are today and that such sharing is an important next step for advancing the field of cognitive neuroscience.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 11%
Germany 2 4%
Netherlands 1 2%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 37 80%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 30%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 17%
Student > Master 7 15%
Professor 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 9 20%
Unknown 1 2%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 8 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 17%
Psychology 8 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 15%
Engineering 5 11%
Other 9 20%
Unknown 1 2%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 March 2012.
All research outputs
#15,242,707
of 22,663,969 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#3,022
of 3,397 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,777
of 109,028 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#35
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,663,969 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,397 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.6. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 109,028 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.