Supplementary material: Negative valence in Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: A worldwide mega-analysis of task-based functional neuroimaging data of the ENIGMA-OCD consortium

<p>The ridge plots attached here accompany the supplement to the manuscript <em>Negative valence in Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: A worldwide mega-analysis of task-based functional neuroimaging data of the ENIGMA-OCD consortium</em>&nbsp;(Dzinalija et al., 2024)<em>. </em>These are full results of Figures 1, 2C, and 3C of the manuscript and Figures S3, S5, S7 and S9 of the supplement depicting whole-brain Bayesian multilevel models run using the Regional Bayesian Analysis toolbox (RBA; Chen et al., 2019). Whole-brain analyses were parcelated into the Schaefer-Yeo 7-network 200-parcel cortical atlas (Schaefer et al., 2018) and the Melbourne 32-region subcortical atlas (Tian et al., 2020). Results are presented according to contrast of interests: [Negative &gt; Neutral], [OCD &gt; Neutral], [Threat &gt; Neutral], and [OCD &gt; Threat], and effects of interest: [Diagnosis = OCD or HC], [MED = medication], [AO = age of onset], [YBOCS = OCD severity], and [Intercept = task effect].&nbsp;</p> <p>P+ values denote the probability that there is increased brain activation in a given region of the Schaefer 200-parcel 7-network cortical atlas and Melbourne 32-region subcortical atlas. We used the guidelines proposed by Chen et al. (2019) to infer credibility of evidence, namely taking a positive posterior probability (P+) of &lt;0.10 or &gt;0.90 as indication of moderate evidence and, &lt;0.05 or &gt;0.95 or &lt;0.025 or &gt;0.975 as strong or very strong evidence, respectively. To interpret the pairwise comparisons presented as Group1-vs-Group2, posterior distributions to the right of the green no-effect line represent regions in which individuals in Group 1 show credible evidence for higher activation than individuals in Group 2. Regions with posterior distributions to the left of this line show credible evidence for higher activity in Group 2 than in Group 1.&nbsp; (Darker) red color represents regions in which individuals in Group 1 show moderate-to-very-strong evidence for higher activation than Group 2. (Darker) blue color represents regions in which Group 2 show moderate-to-very-strong evidence for higher activation than Group 1. Grey color represents regions in which there is no strong evidence of a difference between Group 1 and Group 2. Schaefer-Yeo 200-parcel atlas name abbreviations can be retrieved <a href="https://github.com/ThomasYeoLab/CBIG/tree/master/stable_projects/brain_parcellation/Schaefer2018_LocalGlobal/Parcellations">via this link.</a></p>