Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Over the past year, a heated discussion about 'circular' or 'nonindependent' analysis in brain imaging has emerged in the literature. An analysis is circular (or nonindependent) if it is based on data that were selected for showing the effect of interest or a related effect. The authors of this paper are researchers who have contributed to the discussion and span a range of viewpoints. To clarify points of agreement and disagreement in the community, we collaboratively assembled a series of questions on circularity herein, to which we provide our individual current answers in <or=100 words per question. Although divergent views remain on some of the questions, there is also a substantial convergence of opinion, which we have summarized in a consensus box. The box provides the best current answers that the five authors could agree upon.

Original publication

DOI

10.1038/jcbfm.2010.86

Type

Journal article

Journal

Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism

Publication Date

09/2010

Volume

30

Pages

1551 - 1557

Addresses

MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, Cambridge, UK.

Keywords

Brain, Brain Mapping, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Neurosciences, Selection Bias, Research Design, Publications, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Guidelines as Topic