Nicole Petersen

Benchmarking methods for mapping functional connectivity in the brain - Nature Methods In this Analysis, Liu et al. benchmark more than 200 pairwise statistics for functional brain connectivity in tasks such as hub mapping, distance relationships, structure–function coupling and behavio...

An Analysis of 200 pairwise statistics for functional brain connectivity in tasks such as hub mapping, distance relationships, structure-function coupling and behavior prediction highlights their effectiveness for neurophysiological applications.

www.nature.com/articles/s41...

we are entering a whole new era of brain imaging analytics 🤩🧠

really cool!!! love to see the convergence across PET / genes / fMRI. please please consider making the .niis / statistical maps from figs 3-5 downloadable!! curious to see how closely the activation pattern you report overlaps with other CUD studies 😁

high-dose stimulants lead to psychosis -- basically, if you keep turning up the "salience" volume eventually everything seems salient and the brain scrambles to explain it?

this paper was such a joy to read. in addition to the very thorough treatment of the data I love how densely-referenced the intro is; I think I learned something from every sentence! one passing thought about the salience boost -- I wonder if that's the mechanism by which (cont)

My med school textbook says stimulants like Ritalin treat hyperactivity by “stimulating” the brain’s attention and cognitive control systems. We studied children taking stimulants in the ABCD Study, and the largest differences were actually in arousal and reward networks! Check out our preprint!

I'm curious if some journals are already implementing this. I have 1 paper under re-review and got 3 reviews. R3 was clearly written by AI, but I assumed someone got invited to review and used AI. I checked the researchsquare timeline and only 2 reviewers ever agreed.

thank you, I just dipped my toe in (louvain) and will be taking it back out. sbm = stochastic block model?

A network correspondence toolbox for quantitative evaluation of novel neuroimaging results - Nature Communications Here, the authors present the Network Correspondence Toolbox, which enables researchers to examine and report spatial correspondence between their neuroimaging results and widely used brain atlases.

It's finally here! Use the Network Correspondence Toolbox to help contextualize your neuroimaging findings 🧠

Mapping dopaminergic projections in the human brain with resting-state fMRI A functional connectivity gradient in striatum is obtained that maps onto DaT SPECT-derived dopaminergic projections and thereby likely provides a new biomarker for investigating dopaminergic (dys)fun...

super cool -- thought this might be of interest if you hadn't seen it already: elifesciences.org/articles/71846

thank you!! reassuring that this is business as usual!

Congrats, very cool finding and wow, what an effort!! I bet we could use tms + fmri to test this circuit in humans 🧐

Caio is having a good day. Another preprint on which he's first author -- this time, describing pathways through the connectome for indirectly stimulating subgenual cingulate cortex in the context of depression.

Neuroanatomical pathways of TMS therapy for depression

www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1...

(PDF) Real-world effectiveness of a single-day regimen for transcranial magnetic stimulation using Optimized, Neuroplastogen-Enhanced techniques in Depression (ONE-D) PDF | Background: Conventional transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) regimens are logistically burdensome, requiring days or weeks of clinic visits.... | Find, read and cite all the research you nee...

New landmark TMS trial dropped by Jonathan Downar's team, which will revolutionize care for depression even more than the SAINT trial did – extensive (10 hour!) sessions of TMS in a single day, enhanced by single dose of cycloserine. 90% response, 70% remission!

www.researchgate.net/publication/...

I guess I'm a little surprised by the intransigence of journals. on social media, we are all! about! high! rigor! studies! null and "boring" results are welcome as long as the study was conducted well! but those same studies get desk rejected from "high impact" journals every day.

this is the content I'm here for! when you're ~15ish applications into that streak it's hard to know if you should keep going or jump ship.

2/2

The second is my solution for the replication crisis. It was recently accepted at Assessment.

"How to Produce, Identify, and Motivate Robust Psychological Science: A Roadmap and a Response to Vize et al."

doi.org/10.31234/osf...

New paper out in @ScienceMagazine! In 8 studies (multiple platforms, methods, time periods) we find: misinformation evokes more outrage than trustworthy news, when it does it's shared more + ppl are less likely to read before sharing. w/ @killianmcl1 @Klonick @mollycrockett 🧵👇

sure, everyone agrees on that. easier said than done! and blaming right wing mis/disinformation overlooks that scientists have -- without those bad actors -- burned a lot of credibility via genuine bad behavior. not all scientific mistrust is misplaced, and that's a different kind of problem

not just transparency. rigor + transparency

sure, but scientists do have control over the explicit fraud and less obvious questionable research practices that they engage in on a regular basis. this starts with editors, funders, etc incentivizing transparency over "wow cool"

A LITTLE LOUDER FOR THE STUDY SECTIONS IN THE BACK: ". . . classical functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) . . . can be reliable when averaged across tens of people, or even in an individual, given sufficient repetition."

Love to see this conversation starting!
"Study design features increase replicability in brain-wide association studies"

Full article led by Kaidi Kang and Simon Vandekar + awesome News+Views by @roselynechauvin.bsky.social & @ndosenbach.bsky.social!
👇
www.nature.com/articles/s41...

#neuroskyence

Low agreement among reviewers evaluating the same NIH grant applications | PNAS Obtaining grant funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is increasingly competitive, as funding success rates have declined over the p...

+1 to all. also: quality of reviews needs attn. everyone has heard of / experienced an app scoring just out of payline, resubmitted, and ND. or the less anecdotal version: www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/...

such low ICCs would be unacceptable for any research tool. not all reviews are bad. but too many.

🧠 hello #neuroskyence! happy to share my early career commentary in neuropsychopharmacology, highlighting the importance of understanding sex hormones for understanding the brain: www.nature.com/articles/s41...

big thanks to the thoughtful reviewers, very helpful editorial team at Nature Mental Health, our wonderful collaborators, and each and every person who made this possible -- and huge congrats to first author Michael Apostol!

effects on affect (😵‍💫) more broadly. there are a few more really cool additional findings in the paper which I will not spoil for you! read on and if you can't access reach out to one of us.

he found through a careful mediation analysis that craving and withdrawal symptoms are strongly correlated with anxiety symptoms -- but dlPFC stimulation only relieves craving and withdrawal, and this is not mediated by reductions in anxiety, or

does neuromodulation to dlPFC only reduce craving and withdrawal because it's improving underlying mood problems (like anxiety, which often heightens during withdrawal)? or is it having a unique effect on craving (separate from well-known effects on mood)?