Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26268446›Full record

ArticleJournal of neural engineering2015

The effects of spatial filtering and artifacts on electrocorticographic signals.

Y Liu, W G Coon, A de Pesters, P Brunner, G Schalk

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neural engineering, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing 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

37 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Pilot Trial of Perampanel on Peritumoral Hyperexcitability in Newly Diagnosed High-grade Glioma.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2024
    Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Subthalamic-Cortical Network Reorganization during Parkinson's Tremor.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2021
    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

5 authors.

Y LiuSchool of Mechanical Engineering, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing, People's Republic of China. National Center for Adaptive Neurotechnologies, Wadsworth Center, New York State Department of Health, Albany, NY, USA.
W G Coon
A de Pesters
P Brunner
G Schalk

Funding

Training and DisseminationP41EB018783 · NIBIB · WADSWORTH CENTER · PI Jonathan Saul Carp · 2014 to 2026
$15.4M
GENERAL PURPOSE BRAIN-COMPUTER INTERFACE(BCI)SYSTEMR01EB000856 · NIBIB · WADSWORTH CENTER · PI SCHALK, GERWIN, WOLPAW, JONATHAN RICKEL · 2002 to 2012
$9.3M
BCI2000: SOFTWARE FOR BRAIN-COMPUTER INTERFACE RESEARCHR01EB006356 · NIBIB · WADSWORTH CENTER · PI SCHALK, GERWIN · 2006 to 2009
$1.3M
NIBIB NIH HHS EB006356NIBIB NIH HHS EB00856NIBIB NIH HHS EB018783NIBIB NIH HHS P41 EB018783NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB000856NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB006356
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveElectrocorticographic (ECoG) signals contain noise that is common to all channels and noise that is specific to individual channels. Most published ECoG studies use common average reference (CAR) spatial filters to remove common noise, but CAR filters may introduce channel-specific noise into other channels. To address this concern, scientists often remove artifactual channels prior to data analysis. However, removing these channels depends on expert-based labeling and may also discard useful data. Thus, the effects of spatial filtering and artifacts on ECoG signals have been largely unknown. This study aims to quantify these effects and thereby address this gap in knowledge. APPROACH: In this study, we address these issues by exploring the effects of application of two types of unsupervised spatial filters and three methods of detecting signal artifacts using a large ECoG data set (20 subjects, four task conditions in each subject). MAIN

resultsOur results confirm that spatial filtering improves performance, i.e., it reduces ECoG signal variance that is not related to the task. They also show that removing artifactual channels automatically (using quantitatively defined rejection criteria) or manually (using expert opinion) does not increase the total amount of task-related information, but does avoid potential contamination from one or more noisy channels. Finally, applying a novel 'median average reference' filter does not require the elimination of artifactual channels prior to spatial filtering and still mitigates the influence of channels with channel-specific noise. Thus, it allows the investigator to retain more potentially useful task-related data. SIGNIFICANCE: In summary, our results show that appropriately designed spatial filters that account for both common noise and channel-specific noise greatly improve the quality of ECoG signal analyses, and that artifacts in only a single channel can result in profound and undesired effects on all other channels.

Indexed as

ArtifactsSignal Processing, Computer-AssistedAdolescentAdultAlgorithmsCerebral CortexElectrocorticographyEpilepsyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPattern Recognition, AutomatedReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificitySpatio-Temporal Analysis

Identifiers

PMID26268446
PMCPMC5485665

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.