Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Reporting checklists in neuroimaging: promoting transparency, replicability, and reproducibility

  • Hamed Ekhtiari
  • , Mehran Zare-Bidoky
  • , Arshiya Sangchooli
  • , Alireza Valyan
  • , Anissa Abi-Dargham
  • , Dara M. Cannon
  • , Cameron S. Carter
  • , Hugh Garavan
  • , Tony P. George
  • , Peyman Ghobadi-Azbari
  • , Christoph Juchem
  • , John H. Krystal
  • , Thomas E. Nichols
  • , Dost Öngür
  • , Cyril R. Pernet
  • , Russell A. Poldrack
  • , Paul M. Thompson
  • , Martin P. Paulus
  • University of Minnesota Twin Cities
  • Laureate Institute for Brain Research
  • Tehran University of Medical Sciences
  • University of Melbourne
  • University of Galway
  • University of California at Irvine
  • University of Vermont
  • Institute for Mental Health Policy and Research at CAMH
  • University of Toronto
  • Columbia University
  • Yale University
  • Department of Veterans Affairs
  • University of Oxford
  • McLean Hospital
  • Harvard University
  • University of Copenhagen
  • Stanford University
  • University of Southern California

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

9 Scopus citations

Abstract

Neuroimaging plays a crucial role in understanding brain structure and function, but the lack of transparency, reproducibility, and reliability of findings is a significant obstacle for the field. To address these challenges, there are ongoing efforts to develop reporting checklists for neuroimaging studies to improve the reporting of fundamental aspects of study design and execution. In this review, we first define what we mean by a neuroimaging reporting checklist and then discuss how a reporting checklist can be developed and implemented. We consider the core values that should inform checklist design, including transparency, repeatability, data sharing, diversity, and supporting innovations. We then share experiences with currently available neuroimaging checklists. We review the motivation for creating checklists and whether checklists achieve their intended objectives, before proposing a development cycle for neuroimaging reporting checklists and describing each implementation step. We emphasize the importance of reporting checklists in enhancing the quality of data repositories and consortia, how they can support education and best practices, and how emerging computational methods, like artificial intelligence, can help checklist development and adherence. We also highlight the role that funding agencies and global collaborations can play in supporting the adoption of neuroimaging reporting checklists. We hope this review will encourage better adherence to available checklists and promote the development of new ones, and ultimately increase the quality, transparency, and reproducibility of neuroimaging research.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)67-84
Number of pages18
JournalNeuropsychopharmacology
Volume50
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 2024

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Reporting checklists in neuroimaging: promoting transparency, replicability, and reproducibility'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this