Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25671095›Full record

ArticleGigaScience2014

Event-related potential datasets based on a three-stimulus paradigm.

Lukas Vareka, Petr Bruha, Roman Moucek

Abstract readDataset
In one paragraph

Article in GigaScience, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Brain-Computer Interface: Advancement and Challenges.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Lukas VarekaDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Faculty of Applied Sciences, University of West Bohemia, Univerzitní 8, 306 14 Plzeň, Czech Republic.
Petr BruhaDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Faculty of Applied Sciences, University of West Bohemia, Univerzitní 8, 306 14 Plzeň, Czech Republic.
Roman MoucekDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Faculty of Applied Sciences, University of West Bohemia, Univerzitní 8, 306 14 Plzeň, Czech Republic.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe event-related potentials technique is widely used in cognitive neuroscience research. The P300 waveform has been explored in many research articles because of its wide applications, such as lie detection or brain-computer interfaces (BCI). However, very few datasets are publicly available. Therefore, most researchers use only their private datasets for their analysis. This leads to minimally comparable results, particularly in brain-computer research interfaces. Here we present electroencephalography/event-related potentials (EEG/ERP) data. The data were obtained from 20 healthy subjects and was acquired using an odd-ball hardware stimulator. The visual stimulation was based on a three-stimulus paradigm and included target, non-target and distracter stimuli. The data and collected metadata are shared in the EEG/ERP Portal.

findingsThe paper also describes the process and validation results of the presented data. The data were validated using two different methods. The first method evaluated the data by measuring the percentage of artifacts. The second method tested if the expectation of the experimental results was fulfilled (i.e., if the target trials contained the P300 component). The validation proved that most datasets were suitable for subsequent analysis.

conclusionsThe presented datasets together with their metadata provide researchers with an opportunity to study the P300 component from different perspectives. Furthermore, they can be used for BCI research.

Indexed as

Event-related potentialsLEDP300Three-stimulus paradigmVisual stimulation

Identifiers

PMID25671095
PMCPMC4322487

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.