ArticleImaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)2024
From brain to education through machine learning: Predicting literacy and numeracy skills from neuroimaging data.
Article in Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multimodal investigation of the neurocognitive deficits underlying dyslexia in adulthood.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2025Article
- Predicting Real-Life Cognitive Scores From Functional Connectivity.Human brain mapping · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The potential of using neural data to predict academic outcomes has always been at the heart of educational neuroscience, an emerging field at the crossroad of psychology, neuroscience, and education sciences. Although this prospect has long been elusive, the exponential use of advanced techniques in machine learning in neuroimaging may change this state of affairs. Here we provide a review of neuroimaging studies that have used machine learning to predict literacy and numeracy outcomes in adults and children, in both the context of learning disability and typical performance. We notably review the cross-sectional and longitudinal designs used in such studies, and describe how they can be coupled with regression and classification approaches. Our review highlights the promise of these methods for predicting literacy and numeracy outcomes, as well as their difficulties. However, we also found a large variability in terms of algorithms and underlying brain circuits across studies, and a relative lack of studies investigating longitudinal prediction of outcomes in young children before the onset of formal education. We argue that the field needs a standardization of methods, as well as a greater use of accessible and portable neuroimaging methods that have more applicability potential than lab-based neuroimaging techniques.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.