Multivariate pattern analysis (MVPA) has become an important tool for identifying brain representations of psychological processes and clinical outcomes using fMRI and related methods. Such methods can be used to predict or 'decode' psychological states in individual subjects. Single-subject MVPA approaches, however, are limited by the amount and quality of individual-subject data. In spite of higher spatial resolution, predictive accuracy from single-subject data often does not exceed what can be accomplished using coarser, group-level maps, because single-subject patterns are trained on limited amounts of often-noisy data. Here, we present a method that combines population-level priors, in the form of biomarker patterns developed on prior samples, with single-subject MVPA maps to improve single-subject prediction. Theoretical results and simulations motivate a weighting based on the relative variances of biomarker-based prediction-based on population-level predictive maps from prior groups-and individual-subject, cross-validated prediction. Empirical results predicting pain using brain activity on a trial-by-trial basis (single-trial prediction) across 6 studies (N = 180 participants) confirm the theoretical predictions. Regularization based on a population-level biomarker-in this case, the Neurologic Pain Signature (NPS)-improved single-subject prediction accuracy compared with idiographic maps based on the individuals' data alone. The regularization scheme that we propose, which we term group-regularized individual prediction (GRIP), can be applied broadly to within-person MVPA-based prediction. We also show how GRIP can be used to evaluate data quality and provide benchmarks for the appropriateness of population-level maps like the NPS for a given individual or study.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 May 2026.
All research outputs
#4,589,014
of 32,770,949 outputs
Outputs from NeuroImage
#3,084
of 13,377 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,282
of 428,664 outputs
Outputs of similar age from NeuroImage
#62
of 229 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,770,949 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,377 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 428,664 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 229 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
