ArticleHuman brain mapping2026
Precision Imaging for Intraindividual Investigation of the Reward Response.
Article in Human brain mapping, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Bioinformed idiographic symptom networks to identify neurobiological predictors of affective-state transitions in bipolar disorder.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The reliance of fMRI research on between-person comparisons is limited by low test-retest reliability and an inability to explain within-person processes. Intraindividual studies are needed to understand how changes in brain functioning relate to changes in behavior. Here, we present open data and analysis of a novel intensively sampled fMRI study. This precision imaging dataset includes 44 sessions acquired across four participants at a twice-weekly rate. In each session, participants completed multiple reward-related tasks, mood and alertness ratings, and a behavioral mood manipulation. We examined how the reward response reflects between-person or within-person variance. Trial-level models suggested dramatically more trials than typically collected are needed to maximize reliability within runs and individuals. Test-retest reliability of the reward response was very low and not explained by measurement error, suggesting low power for between-person comparisons without large amounts of data. At an intraindividual level, mood and alertness explained up to 37% of the intraindividual variance of the anticipatory reward response. Finally, we found that while reliability or brain-behavior associations were not improved by multi-echo denoising, a multivariate reward signature had stronger intraindividual behavioral associations than a univariate anatomical mask. Together, results suggest that the BOLD reward response is not a stable trait-like marker, but moderated by state-like factors. More broadly, BOLD activation to reward tasks-and likely other fMRI tasks-presents substantial opportunity for within-person study to complement the traditional focus on between-person study. We conclude with a discussion of considerations for intensive longitudinal neuroimaging designs.
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.