Published eLetters
Guidelines
As a forum for professional feedback, submissions of letters are open to all. You do not need to be a subscriber. To avoid redundancy, we urge you to read other people's letters before submitting your own. Name, current appointment, place of work, and email address are required to send a letter, and will be published with your review. We also require that you declare any competing financial interests. Unprofessional submissions will not be considered or responded to.
Submit a Response to This Article
Jump to comment:
No eLetters have been published for this article.
In this issue
What N Is N-ough for MRI-Based Animal Neuroimaging?
Jump to section
- Article
- Abstract
- Large N Is Becoming the Norm for MRI-Based Human Neuroimaging
- Are the Considerations for Large N Different for Animal Studies?
- Are Effects Larger in MRI-Based Animal Neuroimaging than Behavioral Studies?
- Small Effects Are Not Bad. It Is Our Study Designs That Are Inadequate
- What Are We Trying to Accomplish?
- The Unparalleled Power (and Dimensionality) of Animal Research
- Humans Are Similar, Mice Are (Almost) Identical: Do We Really Understand the Sources of Heterogeneity in Our Neuroimaging Data?
- Increasing N Is Not Our Only Option for Improving Our Science
- What If the Effect Size Is Too Small to Detect with a Small N? Is N = 1,000 Ethical in Animal Research?
- How Animal Neuroimaging Data Are Obtained Matters
- Are We Able/Ready to Handle Big Datasets?
- What Should We Focus on, Instead?
- End Debate—Scene Unfreezes—Time to Answer the Question
- Footnotes
- References
- Synthesis
- Info & Metrics
- eLetters