Translational Psychiatry· 2026Q1
Counteracting the overestimation of effect size in mass-univariate brain-wide association studies using cross-validation
- 7citations
- Q1SCImago
- 2026year
Short summary
Cross-validation in mass-univariate brain-wide association studies significantly reduces overestimated effect sizes, particularly in smaller samples, revealing that effects often do not generalize to novel data.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- Mass-univariate brain-wide association studies commonly overestimate effect sizes, especially in smaller samples.
- Without cross-validation, effect sizes for BMI predicting gray matter density were overestimated up to R²p = 0.535 in small samples (n=25), versus a true R²p = 0.036.
- Cross-validation revealed that these inflated effects did not generalize to novel data.
- A minimum sample size of n=100 was needed for the largest effects to generalize, and n=400 for smaller effects.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
Abstract Background Brain-wide association effects are commonly overestimated in psychiatric neuroimaging research, leading to low replicability and generalizability of findings, and ultimately to poor translation to clinical utility. Cross-validation is currently not standardly used in univariate neuroimaging analyses but could pose a potential counteracting measure for this problem. Methods We systematically evaluated the benefit of a cross-validation procedure to expose inflated effect size estimates in mass-univariate voxel-based analysis, using body mass index (BMI) as an example predictor for gray matter. A total of n = 3401 MRI scans from a psychiatric cohort were used to investigate the impact of applying cross-validation on effect size estimates across a range of sample sizes and across different localizations with a range of underlying pooled effect sizes. Results BMI was negatively associated with gray matter density with a maximum underlying effect size of R ² p = 0.036 (in the full sample of n = 3401). However, without cross-validation, effects were substantially overestimated in small samples, with effect sizes ranging up to R ² p = 0.535. Even with an underlying null-effect, effect size estimates up to R ² p = 0.429 were reached in samples with n = 25. Applying cross-validation revealed that these inflated effects in small samples did not generalize to novel data. A minimum sample size of n = 100 was required for largest brain-wide effects to start generalizing, while samples with n = 400 were needed for smaller effects to generalize. This ‘point of initial generalizability’ was not reached for underlying null effects, even with the maximum available sample of n = 3401. Conclusions Results suggest that cross-validation is an effective measure to expose overestimated effects in small samples and thus could help to counteract low replicability and generalizability in brain-wide mass-univariate association studies. Open-source code is provided for practical implementation.
The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Translational Psychiatry, 2026 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: Cognitive Neuroscience
Cognitive NeuroscienceNeuroscience