Role of Semantic Paradigms for Optimization of Language Mapping in Clinical fMRI Studies

REFERENCES

1. 1.↵
   1. Seghier ML,
   2. Lazeyras F,
   3. Pegna AJ,
   4. et al

   . Variability of fMRI activation during a phonological and semantic language task in healthy subjects. Hum Brain Mapp 2004;23:140–55

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
2. 2.↵
   1. Saur D,
   2. Kreher BW,
   3. Schnell S,
   4. et al

   . Ventral and dorsal pathways for language. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2008;105:18035–40

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
3. 3.↵
   1. Partovi S,
   2. Konrad F,
   3. Karimi S,
   4. et al

   . Effects of covert and overt paradigms in clinical language fMRI. Acad Radiol 2012;19:518–25

   CrossRefPubMed
4. 4.↵
   1. Zacà D,
   2. Nickerson JP,
   3. Deib G,
   4. et al

   . Effectiveness of four different clinical fMRI paradigms for preoperative regional determination of language lateralization in patients with brain tumors. Neuroradiology 2012;54:1015–25

   CrossRefPubMed
5. 5.↵
   1. Ruff IM,
   2. Petrovich Brennan NM,
   3. Peck KK,
   4. et al

   . Assessment of the language laterality index in patients with brain tumor using functional MR imaging: effects of thresholding, task selection, and prior surgery. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2008;29:528–35

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
6. 6.↵
   1. Branco DM,
   2. Suarez RO,
   3. Whalen S,
   4. et al

   . Functional MRI of memory in the hippocampus: laterality indices may be more meaningful if calculated from whole voxel distributions. Neuroimage 2006;32:592–602

   CrossRefPubMed
7. 7.↵
   1. Palmer ED,
   2. Rosen HJ,
   3. Ojemann JG,
   4. et al

   . An event-related fMRI study of overt and covert word stem completion. Neuroimage 2001;14(1 pt 1):182–93

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
8. 8.↵
   1. Eulitz C,
   2. Elbert T,
   3. Bartenstein P,
   4. et al

   . Comparison of magnetic and metabolic brain activity during a verb generation task. Neuroreport 1994;6:97–100

   PubMedWeb of Science
9. 9.↵
   1. Paulesu E,
   2. Goldacre B,
   3. Scifo P,
   4. et al

   . Functional heterogeneity of left inferior frontal cortex as revealed by fMRI. Neuroreport 1997;8:2011–17

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
10. 10.↵
    1. Kawashima R,
    2. Okuda J,
    3. Umetsu A,
    4. et al

    . Human cerebellum plays an important role in memory-timed finger movement: an fMRI study. J Neurophysiol 2000;83:1079–87

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
11. 11.↵
    1. Vigneau M,
    2. Beaucousin V,
    3. Herve PY,
    4. et al

    . What is right-hemisphere contribution to phonological, lexico-semantic, and sentence processing? Insights from a meta-analysis. Neuroimage 2011;54:577–93

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
12. 12.↵
    1. Binder JR,
    2. Desai RH,
    3. Graves WW,
    4. et al

    . Where is the semantic system? A critical review and meta-analysis of 120 functional neuroimaging studies. Cereb Cortex 2009;19:2767–96

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
13. 13.↵
    1. Burton MW,
    2. Small SL,
    3. Blumstein SE

    . The role of segmentation in phonological processing: an fMRI investigation. J Cogn Neurosci 2000;12:679–90

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
14. 14.↵
    1. Hsieh L,
    2. Gandour J,
    3. Wong D,
    4. et al

    . Functional heterogeneity of inferior frontal gyrus is shaped by linguistic experience. Brain Lang 2001;76:227–52

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
15. 15.↵
    1. Wilson SM,
    2. Iacoboni M

    . Neural responses to non-native phonemes varying in producibility: evidence for the sensorimotor nature of speech perception. Neuroimage 2006;33:316–25

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
16. 16.↵
    1. Wilson SM,
    2. Saygin AP,
    3. Sereno MI,
    4. et al

    . Listening to speech activates motor areas involved in speech production. Nat Neurosci 2004;7:701–02

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
17. 17.↵
    1. Vandenberghe R,
    2. Price C,
    3. Wise R,
    4. et al

    . Functional anatomy of a common semantic system for words and pictures. Nature 1996;383:254–56

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
18. 18.↵
    1. Booth JR,
    2. Burman DD,
    3. Meyer JR,
    4. et al

    . Functional anatomy of intra- and cross-modal lexical tasks. Neuroimage 2002;16:7–22

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
19. 19.↵
    1. Démonet JF,
    2. Chollet F,
    3. Ramsay S,
    4. et al

    . The anatomy of phonological and semantic processing in normal subjects. Brain 1992;115(pt 6):1753–68

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
20. 20.↵
    1. Niskanen E,
    2. Kononen M,
    3. Villberg V,
    4. et al

    . The effect of fMRI task combinations on determining the hemispheric dominance of language functions. Neuroradiology 2012;54:393–405

    CrossRefPubMed
21. 21.↵
    1. Suarez RO,
    2. Whalen S,
    3. Nelson AP,
    4. et al

    . Threshold-independent functional MRI determination of language dominance: a validation study against clinical gold standards. Epilepsy Behav 2009;16:288–97

    CrossRefPubMed
22. 22.↵
    1. Ackermann H

    . Cerebellar contributions to speech production and speech perception: psycholinguistic and neurobiological perspectives. Trends Neurosci 2008;31:265–72

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
23. 23.↵
    1. Fiez JA,
    2. Petersen SE,
    3. Cheney MK,
    4. et al

    . Impaired non-motor learning and error detection associated with cerebellar damage: a single case study. Brain 1992;115(pt 1):155–78

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
24. 24.↵
    1. Specht K,
    2. Reul J

    . Functional segregation of the temporal lobes into highly differentiated subsystems for auditory perception: an auditory rapid event-related fMRI-task. Neuroimage 2003;20:1944–54

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
25. 25.↵
    1. Thierry G,
    2. Giraud AL,
    3. Price C

    . Hemispheric dissociation in access to the human semantic system. Neuron 2003;38:499–506

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science