ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2026
Empirical validation of race-neutral normative brain morphometry models across ethnoracially diverse populations.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
35 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Normative models of brain morphometry quantify individual deviations from typical anatomical patterns and hold promise for enhancing clinical decision-making. However, their clinical utility depends critically on demonstrating generalizability across diverse ethnoracial populations. We previously developed sex-specific, race-neutral normative models for cortical thickness, surface area, and subcortical volumes using brain scans from a large international sample of healthy individuals, as part of the CentileBrain Project, a global initiative to provide open-access, neuroimaging reference models. The primary aim of the present study was to empirically evaluate the generalizability and accuracy of these pretrained models across multiple ethnoracial groups. To this end, we tested model performance in independent samples of healthy individuals from Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Americas, with ethnoracial classification defined either by self-identification or genetic ancestry (N = 4,862). We further compared performance against normative models developed exclusively from a single-population Chinese cohort. Across all groups, as well as in the pooled sample, the pretrained CentileBrain models demonstrated consistently high accuracy, with relative mean absolute error values below 10% for subcortical volume and surface area and below 5% for cortical thickness. Model performance was highly concordant across self-identified and ancestry-defined groups. In a separate analysis, the CentileBrain models performed comparably to a population-specific model when applied to an independent ancestry-matched sample. These findings provide empirical support for the generalizability of race-neutral normative models developed on large and diverse samples and underscore their potential utility for individualized neuroimaging assessment across ethnoracially diverse populations.
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.