Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Update index.md #3

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 7, 2023
Merged

Update index.md #3

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
3 changes: 2 additions & 1 deletion docs/index.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -90,7 +90,8 @@ If you wonder how to interpret these findings in light of Marek, T-C et al.'s re
| Lucina QU. | Brain-behavior associations depend heavily on user-defined criteria | [OHBM Aperture Neuro](https://www.humanbrainmapping.org/files/Aperture%20Neuro/BWAS_5_Commentary_Tiego.pdf) |
| Valk SL., Hettner MD. | Commentary on 'Reproducible brain-wide association studies require thousands of individuals' | [OHBM Aperture Neuro](https://www.humanbrainmapping.org/files/Aperture%20Neuro/BWAS_7_Commentary_ValkHettwer.pdf) |
| Kong XZ., et al. | Scanning reproducible brain-wide associations: sample size is all you need? | [Psychoradiology](https://academic.oup.com/psyrad/article/2/3/67/6758324) |

| J. Goltermann, et al. | Cross-validation for the estimation of effect size generalizability in mass-univariate brain-wide association studies | [BioRxiv](https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2023.03.29.534696v1.abstract) |
| Kang K., et al. | Study design features that improve effect sizes in cross-sectional and longitudinal brain-wide association studies | [BioRxiv](https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.05.29.542742) |



Expand Down