ArticleNeurophotonics2026
Single-subject detection of speech network activation using functional near-infrared spectroscopy.
Article in Neurophotonics, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Significance: Most neuroimaging studies rely on group-level analyses, yet many clinical and translational applications require reliable inference at the level of individual participants. Aim: We evaluated whether functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) can detect expected speech network related activation patterns at the single-subject level. Approach: Twenty-seven adults completed simple listening and speaking tasks while fNIRS data were recorded over bilateral frontal, temporal, and parietal regions. Data were analyzed using general linear models with false discovery rate correction and physiologically informed criteria, including expected HbO/HbR directionality and cross-chromophore coupling. Results: Group-level analyses revealed activation patterns consistent with prior literature, with widespread HbO increases and HbR decreases. At the single-subject level, most participants showed task-related activation within predefined cortical regions, although the number and spatial distribution of significant channels varied. Speaking elicited more robust and consistent activation than listening. HbO and HbR responses were positively associated across channels, indicating coherent neurovascular coupling. Conclusions: fNIRS can detect physiologically plausible activation patterns at the individual level, even in brief paradigms. However, variability across participants highlights the need to optimize task design and signal quality for reliable single-subject inference.
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.