Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26509448›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

EEG-MEG Integration Enhances the Characterization of Functional and Effective Connectivity in the Resting State Network.

Muthuraman Muthuraman, Vera Moliadze, Kidist Gebremariam Mideksa, Abdul Rauf Anwar, Ulrich Stephani, Günther Deuschl, Christine M Freitag, Michael Siniatchkin

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Separating vascular and neuronal effects of age on fMRI BOLD signals.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Muthuraman MuthuramanDepartment of Neurology, Christian-Albrechts-University, Kiel, Germany.
Vera MoliadzeInstitute of Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, Christian-Albrechts-University, Kiel, Germany; Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Psychosomatics and Psychotherapy, Goethe-University Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt, Germany.
Kidist Gebremariam MideksaDigital signal processing and system theory, Christian-Albrechts-University, Kiel, Germany.
Abdul Rauf AnwarDigital signal processing and system theory, Christian-Albrechts-University, Kiel, Germany.
Ulrich StephaniDepartment of Neuropediatrics, Christian-Albrechts-University, Kiel, Germany.
Günther DeuschlDepartment of Neurology, Christian-Albrechts-University, Kiel, Germany.
Christine M FreitagDepartment of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Psychosomatics and Psychotherapy, Goethe-University Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt, Germany.
Michael SiniatchkinInstitute of Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, Christian-Albrechts-University, Kiel, Germany; Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Psychosomatics and Psychotherapy, Goethe-University Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt, Germany.
Kiel University · DEGoethe University Frankfurt · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

At the sensor level many aspects, such as spectral power, functional and effective connectivity as well as relative-power-ratio ratio (RPR) and spatial resolution have been comprehensively investigated through both electroencephalography (EEG) and magnetoencephalography (MEG). Despite this, differences between both modalities have not yet been systematically studied by direct comparison. It remains an open question as to whether the integration of EEG and MEG data would improve the information obtained from the above mentioned parameters. Here, EEG (64-channel system) and MEG (275 sensor system) were recorded simultaneously in conditions with eyes open (EO) and eyes closed (EC) in 29 healthy adults. Spectral power, functional and effective connectivity, RPR, and spatial resolution were analyzed at five different frequency bands (delta, theta, alpha, beta and gamma). Networks of functional and effective connectivity were described using a spatial filter approach called the dynamic imaging of coherent sources (DICS) followed by the renormalized partial directed coherence (RPDC). Absolute mean power at the sensor level was significantly higher in EEG than in MEG data in both EO and EC conditions. At the source level, there was a trend towards a better performance of the combined EEG+MEG analysis compared with separate EEG or MEG analyses for the source mean power, functional correlation, effective connectivity for both EO and EC. The network of coherent sources and the spatial resolution were similar for both the EEG and MEG data if they were analyzed separately. Results indicate that the combined approach has several advantages over the separate analyses of both EEG and MEG. Moreover, by a direct comparison of EEG and MEG, EEG was characterized by significantly higher values in all measured parameters in both sensor and source level. All the above conclusions are specific to the resting state task and the specific analysis used in this study to have general conclusion multi-center studies would be helpful.

Indexed as

AdultBrain MappingElectroencephalographyFemaleHumansMagnetoencephalographyMaleModels, TheoreticalNeural PathwaysYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID26509448
PMCPMC4624977
OpenAlexW2163626131

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.