Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23313417›Full record

ArticleNeuroImage2013

Identifying the sources of the pulse artefact in EEG recordings made inside an MR scanner.

Karen J Mullinger, Jade Havenhand, Richard Bowtell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NeuroImage, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. [Study of denoising of simultaneous electroencephalogram-functional magnetic resonance imaging signal based on real-time constrained independent components analysis].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2019
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. EEG-Informed fMRI: A Review of Data Analysis Methods.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2018
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Karen J MullingerSir Peter Mansfield Magnetic Resonance Centre, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK. karen.mullinger@nottingham.ac.uk
Jade Havenhand
Richard Bowtell

Funding

Medical Research Council EP/J006823/1Medical Research Council G0901321
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

EEG recordings made during concurrent fMRI are confounded by the pulse artefact (PA), which although smaller than the gradient artefact is often more problematic because of its variability over multiple cardiac cycles. A better understanding of the PA is needed in order to generate improved methods for reducing its effect in EEG-fMRI experiments. Here we performed a study aimed at identifying the relative contributions of three putative sources of the PA (cardiac-pulse-driven head rotation, the Hall effect due to pulsatile blood flow and pulse-driven expansion of the scalp) to its amplitude and variability. EEG recordings were made from 6 subjects lying in a 3T scanner. Accelerometers were fixed on the forehead and temple to monitor head motion. A bite-bar and vacuum cushion were used to restrain the head, thus greatly attenuating the contribution of cardiac-driven head rotation to the PA, while an insulating layer placed between the head and the EEG electrodes was used to eliminate the Hall voltage contribution. Using the root mean square (RMS) amplitude of the PA averaged over leads and time as a measure of the PA amplitude, we found that head restraint and insulating layer reduced the PA by 61% and 42%, respectively, when compared with the PA induced with the subject relaxed, indicating that cardiac-pulse-driven head rotation is the dominant source of the PA. With both the insulating layer and head restraint in place, the PA was reduced in RMS amplitude by 78% compared with the relaxed condition, the remaining PA contribution resulting from scalp expansion or residual head motion. The variance of the PA across cardiac cycles was more strongly reduced by the insulating layer than the head restraint, indicating that the flow-induced Hall voltage makes a larger contribution than pulse-driven head rotation to the variability of the PA.

Indexed as

ArtifactsElectroencephalographyMagnetic Resonance ImagingPulseAdultFemaleHeadHumansMaleRotation

Identifiers

PMID23313417
PMCPMC3601330

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.