Better together: A systematic review of studies combining magnetic resonance imaging with ecological momentary assessment.

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q4 NEUROSCIENCES
Social Neuroscience Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-11 DOI:10.1080/17470919.2024.2382771
Reuma Gadassi-Polack, Gabriela Paganini, Julia Winschel, Hadas Benisty, Jutta Joormann, Hedy Kober, Gal Mishne
{"title":"Better together: A systematic review of studies combining magnetic resonance imaging with ecological momentary assessment.","authors":"Reuma Gadassi-Polack, Gabriela Paganini, Julia Winschel, Hadas Benisty, Jutta Joormann, Hedy Kober, Gal Mishne","doi":"10.1080/17470919.2024.2382771","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Social neuroscientists often use magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to understand the relationship between social experiences and their neural substrates. Although MRI is a powerful method, it has several limitations in the study of social experiences, first and foremost its low ecological validity. To address this limitation, researchers have conducted multimethod studies combining MRI with Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA). However, there are no existing recommendations for best practices for conducting and reporting such studies. To address the absence of standards in the field, we conducted a systematic review of papers that combined the methods. A systematic search of peer-reviewed papers resulted in a pool of 11,558 articles. Inclusion criteria were studies in which participants completed (a) Structural or functional MRI and (b) an EMA protocol that included self-report. Seventy-one papers met inclusion criteria. The following review compares these studies based on several key parameters (e.g., sample size) with the aim of determining feasibility and current standards for design and reporting in the field. The review concludes with recommendations for future research. A special focus is given to the ways in which the two methods were combined analytically and suggestions for novel computational methods that could further advance the field of social neuroscience.</p>","PeriodicalId":49511,"journal":{"name":"Social Neuroscience","volume":" ","pages":"151-167"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11511639/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17470919.2024.2382771","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Social neuroscientists often use magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to understand the relationship between social experiences and their neural substrates. Although MRI is a powerful method, it has several limitations in the study of social experiences, first and foremost its low ecological validity. To address this limitation, researchers have conducted multimethod studies combining MRI with Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA). However, there are no existing recommendations for best practices for conducting and reporting such studies. To address the absence of standards in the field, we conducted a systematic review of papers that combined the methods. A systematic search of peer-reviewed papers resulted in a pool of 11,558 articles. Inclusion criteria were studies in which participants completed (a) Structural or functional MRI and (b) an EMA protocol that included self-report. Seventy-one papers met inclusion criteria. The following review compares these studies based on several key parameters (e.g., sample size) with the aim of determining feasibility and current standards for design and reporting in the field. The review concludes with recommendations for future research. A special focus is given to the ways in which the two methods were combined analytically and suggestions for novel computational methods that could further advance the field of social neuroscience.

更好地合作:磁共振成像与生态瞬间评估相结合研究的系统回顾。
社会神经科学家经常使用磁共振成像(MRI)来了解社会经验与其神经基质之间的关系。虽然核磁共振成像是一种强大的方法,但它在社会经验研究中存在一些局限性,首先是生态有效性较低。为了解决这一局限性,研究人员将核磁共振成像与生态瞬间评估(EMA)相结合,开展了多方法研究。然而,目前还没有关于开展和报告此类研究的最佳实践的建议。为了解决该领域缺乏标准的问题,我们对结合了这两种方法的论文进行了系统性回顾。通过对同行评审论文进行系统检索,我们共收集到 11,558 篇文章。纳入标准是参与者完成(a)结构性或功能性 MRI 和(b)包含自我报告的 EMA 方案的研究。有 71 篇论文符合纳入标准。下面的综述将根据几个关键参数(如样本大小)对这些研究进行比较,旨在确定该领域的可行性以及当前的设计和报告标准。综述最后对未来的研究提出了建议。其中特别关注了这两种方法在分析上的结合方式,以及对新型计算方法的建议,这些方法可以进一步推动社会神经科学领域的发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Social Neuroscience
Social Neuroscience 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.00%
发文量
36
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Social Neuroscience features original empirical Research Papers as well as targeted Reviews, Commentaries and Fast Track Brief Reports that examine how the brain mediates social behavior, social cognition, social interactions and relationships, group social dynamics, and related topics that deal with social/interpersonal psychology and neurobiology. Multi-paper symposia and special topic issues are organized and presented regularly as well. The goal of Social Neuroscience is to provide a place to publish empirical articles that intend to further our understanding of the neural mechanisms contributing to the development and maintenance of social behaviors, or to understanding how these mechanisms are disrupted in clinical disorders.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信