Uskomaton tiedemoka: suurin osa #fMRI tutkimuksista tehtiin virhellisellä softalla, 40.000 papers roskaan? https://t.co/XqbfWp2B1Y @ExTechOp
#neuroscience #psychology #science https://t.co/JeUWKX5ZYK The software for fMRI analysis results in false-positive rates of up to 70% ins…
Epic #neuroscience failure: up to 40.000 #fMRI studies done w/ software producing 60-70% false positives https://t.co/XqbfWoKZDo
Ein Software-Bug könnte 20 Jahre Hirnforschung in Frage stellen https://t.co/s3sXoGr7Vq #fb
Cluster failure: Why fMRI inferences for spatial extent have inflated false-positive rates. https://t.co/p2VZB9cq43
fMRI analysis can result in false-positive rates of up to 70%, questioning the validity of some 40,000 fMRI studies https://t.co/pROKwkmzBv
We should find 5% false positives..., but we found that the most software... (SPM, FSL, AFNI) [has] rates up to 70%. https://t.co/fYou3YhbwX
Fehlerhafte MRT-Software schürt Zweifel an Zehntausenden #fMRT-Studien: https://t.co/DZRKEYiPHB - #Hirnforschung #SPM #FSL #AFNI
Worrying for neurosciences: Why fMRI inferences for spatial extent have inflated false-positive rates https://t.co/uvZbM615t8
RT @pathogenomenick: Shocking; fMRI analysis software doesn't work properly and weak data sharing in fields means can't be reanalysed: http…
RT @quantrad: Disaster and embarrassment from not understanding the algorithms you use. Watch out! https://t.co/ltRwDt2t6I
The media have got hold of this story https://t.co/7sphoV9k4W #openaccess Serious, but does not mean 70% of #fMRI studies are invalid!
Cluster failure: Why fMRI inferences for spatial extent have inflated false-positive rates - https://t.co/idcAGeQSJz
The recent fMRI software bug makes me worry about closed and proprietary packages we use in the GIS field :/ https://t.co/mJ3nLrjBVc
RT @jrk: Oh, dear: https://t.co/OBvwRMAM8o
RT @zooko: Goddammit! Does this mean an entire generation of brain science wasted!? https://t.co/jv0hmOhC0Y https://t.co/Dr4HeRsxAN
RT @zooko: Goddammit! Does this mean an entire generation of brain science wasted!? https://t.co/jv0hmOhC0Y https://t.co/Dr4HeRsxAN
https://t.co/yTPkma3noR Minutiae of impact statements should not detract from the importance of the findings in this article @ten_photos
false positives in #fMRI studies likely to be unacceptably high https://t.co/alvpph31Ww #neuroscience #statistics
Cluster failure: Why fMRI inferences for spatial extent have inflated false-positive rates https://t.co/w1OwTz2CWS
RT @davidgruber: @katecrawford the associated journal article attached here for added value: https://t.co/fyhwtKw9en
Ouch! «These results question the validity of some 40,000 fMRI studies» https://t.co/ohCU0g9mMj
70% результатов фМРТ ставится под сомнение https://t.co/kSQy117bPJ
RT @katecrawford: Here's a link to the original journal article: "These results question the validity of some 40,000 fMRI studies." https:/…
Cluster failure: Why fMRI inferences for spatial extent have inflated false-positive rates -- Eklund https://t.co/c1HENajGcX
some pretty huge implications in linguistics, particularly SLA. https://t.co/mcGjpCwwFl
RT @zooko: Goddammit! Does this mean an entire generation of brain science wasted!? https://t.co/jv0hmOhC0Y https://t.co/Dr4HeRsxAN
RT @neuroconscience: Cluster failure: Why fMRI inferences for spatial extent have inflated false-positive rates https://t.co/4H38NuLThB by…
RT @republicofmath: fMRI inferences for spatial extent have inflated false-positive rates https://t.co/R6rlshz4Bp https://t.co/oViVxo1PZW
RT @davidgruber: @katecrawford the associated journal article attached here for added value: https://t.co/fyhwtKw9en
RT @katecrawford: Here's a link to the original journal article: "These results question the validity of some 40,000 fMRI studies." https:/…
RT @katecrawford: Here's a link to the original journal article: "These results question the validity of some 40,000 fMRI studies." https:/…
RT @pathogenomenick: Shocking; fMRI analysis software doesn't work properly and weak data sharing in fields means can't be reanalysed: http…
Disaster and embarrassment from not understanding the algorithms you use. Watch out! https://t.co/ltRwDt2t6I
RT @pathogenomenick: Shocking; fMRI analysis software doesn't work properly and weak data sharing in fields means can't be reanalysed: http…
RT @ykamit: 何も課題をしていない時の脳データに課題のラベルを適当に割り当てて標準的な解析ソフト(SPM他)で解析したら、FWE 5%の設定で、70%近い擬陽性がでることもあるという話。まあ、そうだろうと思ってたけど、ここまでひどいとは https://t.co/6X…
RT @h_okumura: https://t.co/RWtn8GHw3c の話,ちょっと微妙 RT @gigazine: MRI(核磁気共鳴画像法)のソフトウェアにバグ、直近1年の研究結果などが全て無効に https://t.co/plIwFzID51 https://t.…
RT @EdwardTufte: PNAS: fMRI software packages = false-positive rates 70%.Validity 40,000 fMRI studies?! https://t.co/4xf15IqGfp #dataviz #…
RT @pierre_azoulay: Paging all innovation-minded economics grad students: natural experiment alert! https://t.co/WGV3nILMKN
RT @katecrawford: Here's a link to the original journal article: "These results question the validity of some 40,000 fMRI studies." https:/…
These results ... may have a large impact on the interpretation of neuroimaging results." https://t.co/ry3cmpYt2V
RT @katecrawford: Here's a link to the original journal article: "These results question the validity of some 40,000 fMRI studies." https:/…
The false positive rate of SPM, FSL, and AFNI for fMRI data can go as high as 70% https://t.co/1uqOV7Diit
RT @ZukashiT: 「fMRIは原理的に結果を盛っちゃうからね」という趣旨の論文。うん、知ってる♡ https://t.co/EWNEQZgeHD
Psychology has a meta-analysis problem: https://t.co/2o1WZrsfVQ fMRI has a cluster problem: https://t.co/AgF03A4Ni0 https://t.co/X7tMCh6v9T
Questioning 40k studies: software for #fMRI analysis can result in false-positive rates of up to 70%. #neuroethics https://t.co/jzhMTPy494
RT @pathogenomenick: Shocking; fMRI analysis software doesn't work properly and weak data sharing in fields means can't be reanalysed: http…
RT @marcelsalathe: 😱 "These results question the validity of some 40,000 fMRI studies" https://t.co/Ob4RPJQ5wi https://t.co/vE3UDNLM6U
#fMRI is 25 years old yet its most common statistical methods have not been validated using real data. #neuroscience https://t.co/0Jhrcc3NdA
Potentially huge news: Why fMRI inferences for spatial extent have inflated false-positive rates. Orig paper here: https://t.co/OHIhLGQg2P
Why fMRI inferences for spatial extent have inflated false-positive rates https://t.co/Igdej3T0cg
PNAS: for the last 25 years medical diagnoses of the brain via MRI software have been up to %70 false positive https://t.co/Vz1D5anAOm
오... 뭐냐 이건... 잘 모르는 분야이지만, fMRI 관련 논문들이 한동안 쏟아질지도? https://t.co/ixVMIqamD6
fMRI inferences for spatial extent have inflated false-positive rates https://t.co/R6rlshz4Bp https://t.co/oViVxo1PZW
Cluster failure: Why fMRI inferences for spatial extent have inflated false-positive rates: https://t.co/nr3cyg59Oh #fMRI #fMRIproblem
40.000 badań fMRI poddawane pod wątpliwość z powodu błędu w oprogramowaniu? Czasem i 70% stopa błędów https://t.co/EpER3QhuoX @jakmarcin
Never underestimate the power of spatial autocorrelation! https://t.co/rUlMxmHVAQ
RT @annbot: .@MarkHahnel PNAS paper came out last week - software has a bug, questions the validity of 40,000 studies! #SEBAMM https://t.co…
Bit of an o dear for fMRI, I’de be interested to read a rebuttal https://t.co/ZHHiCf6MT8
~40000 fMRI-based scientific researches can be invalid https://t.co/qN329dvJWC https://t.co/BSF4nRffFb
RT @pathogenomenick: Shocking; fMRI analysis software doesn't work properly and weak data sharing in fields means can't be reanalysed: http…
RT @zooko: Goddammit! Does this mean an entire generation of brain science wasted!? https://t.co/jv0hmOhC0Y https://t.co/Dr4HeRsxAN
https://t.co/bIvXkvOrRf OUCH!
RT @pathogenomenick: Shocking; fMRI analysis software doesn't work properly and weak data sharing in fields means can't be reanalysed: http…
RT @pathogenomenick: Shocking; fMRI analysis software doesn't work properly and weak data sharing in fields means can't be reanalysed: http…
RT @marcelsalathe: 😱 "These results question the validity of some 40,000 fMRI studies" https://t.co/Ob4RPJQ5wi https://t.co/vE3UDNLM6U
RT @pathogenomenick: Shocking; fMRI analysis software doesn't work properly and weak data sharing in fields means can't be reanalysed: http…
RT @pathogenomenick: Shocking; fMRI analysis software doesn't work properly and weak data sharing in fields means can't be reanalysed: http…
RT @pathogenomenick: Shocking; fMRI analysis software doesn't work properly and weak data sharing in fields means can't be reanalysed: http…
RT @pathogenomenick: Shocking; fMRI analysis software doesn't work properly and weak data sharing in fields means can't be reanalysed: http…
RT @josherArmstrong: Cluster Failure and the Future of fMRI. These results question the validity of some 40,000 fMRI studies: https://t.co…
40000 papers a lo largo de 20 años basados en resultados erróneos, error de software mediante: https://t.co/yovS8xPGfc
RT @zooko: Goddammit! Does this mean an entire generation of brain science wasted!? https://t.co/jv0hmOhC0Y https://t.co/Dr4HeRsxAN
RT @fulhack: Gaussian assumption turned out to be wrong, 40k papers called into question https://t.co/QxneaT78hm (dad joke: is this the new…
RT @davidgruber: @katecrawford the associated journal article attached here for added value: https://t.co/fyhwtKw9en
Cluster failure and false positives in fMRI and consequences for research: https://t.co/OUmIGGNrRP (PNAS) #research #opendata
RT @zeynep: And then, a bug might mean fMRI studies had false positive rates of 70%, rather than 5%. https://t.co/QPyZdIPG2G https://t.co/b…
And then, a bug might mean fMRI studies had false positive rates of 70%, rather than 5%. https://t.co/QPyZdIPG2G https://t.co/bmrLqRkgeO
RT @halletecco: New study suggests an fMRI false-positive rate of up to 70% https://t.co/6t34lUkoOE via @ddiamond https://t.co/wgLt1ppoUo
Paraphrasing Op Ivy: All we know is that we don't know nuthin...thousands of MRI-bsed papers called into question: https://t.co/BmusCLCTmR
RT @katecrawford: Here's a link to the original journal article: "These results question the validity of some 40,000 fMRI studies." https:/…
RT @katecrawford: Here's a link to the original journal article: "These results question the validity of some 40,000 fMRI studies." https:/…
MRI-based science invalidated because someone finally got around to checking the data! https://t.co/AMbhk1Iuo4 https://t.co/ld6xonwHJ6
@phillord You can get source, but they also ran these programs on a public data from https://t.co/SJn0VCF0ti https://t.co/f2AXyZH3z7
Un duro golpe para las neurociencias | Why fMRI inferences have inflated false-positive rates? https://t.co/qoN2hhVeOs
RT @adamcifu: Always hated fMRI research (pretty pictures without real conclusions). Never expected this kind of flaw. https://t.co/jcUfi4Q…
RT @openmicroscopy: #Opendata matters: fMRI study highlights "lamentable archiving and data-sharing practices" https://t.co/MqFL5V5mku @PNA…
RT @pezlarson: Harsh critique of fMRI-based studies! Trying to do too much with low SNR data? https://t.co/seSRpR9Vfn https://t.co/fsoc3lU…
Harsh critique of fMRI-based studies! Trying to do too much with low SNR data? https://t.co/seSRpR9Vfn https://t.co/fsoc3lUNNr
#MRI this changes everything we thought we knew based on MRI studies https://t.co/5tOtOD17Ib
Obviously, full standardition of diagnostic techniques is mandatory. https://t.co/Joudez0O9K vía @PNASNews
RT @ZukashiT: 「fMRIは原理的に結果を盛っちゃうからね」という趣旨の論文。うん、知ってる♡ https://t.co/EWNEQZgeHD
RT @zooko: Goddammit! Does this mean an entire generation of brain science wasted!? https://t.co/jv0hmOhC0Y https://t.co/Dr4HeRsxAN
#Opendata matters: fMRI study highlights "lamentable archiving and data-sharing practices" https://t.co/MqFL5V5mku @PNASNews
RT @zooko: Goddammit! Does this mean an entire generation of brain science wasted!? https://t.co/jv0hmOhC0Y https://t.co/Dr4HeRsxAN
RT @katecrawford: Here's a link to the original journal article: "These results question the validity of some 40,000 fMRI studies." https:/…