And so that's why this is coming last because we have to solve many
of these other problems before we can really address the translation crisis.
And this is the article that influenced me quite a bit by Kapur, Phillips, and Insel.
The title is, Why has it taken so long for
biological psychiatry to develop clinical tests and what do we do about it?
And there's this feeling that, in science there's lots of research,
in fact, here is a plot of emotion studies that we gathered.
It's 163 studies of emotion.
Yellow is perceived emotions, red are experienced emotions.
So if you want to know where the emotional brain is, there it is.
It's everywhere in the brain.
Of course, these are actually not random activations, but it's very difficult to
sort through exactly which patterns of activation are related to which outcomes.
So we have an accumulation of findings, but we don't have markers that we can
apply to a person and say, this is how sad a person is, or this is whether a person
is angry or not, or whether a person is in pain or not, and so forth.
So some of the causes of our translation crisis are, the lack of brain patterns
sensitive and specific to clinical features or particular clinical outcomes,
lack of application to the individual-person level, and finally,
when we develop these brain maps, we don't usually share them across sites and
test how they work in new studies, new samples, new populations.
So that's another critical piece.
We have to take these brain maps, instead of just putting them in a study, and then
