ArticleCognitive neurodynamics2016
Direction and viewing area-sensitive influence of EOG artifacts revealed in the EEG topographic pattern analysis.
Article in Cognitive neurodynamics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Technical challenges in REM sleep microstructure classification: A study of patients with REM sleep behaviour disorder.Journal of sleep research · 2024Article
- A Removal of Eye Movement and Blink Artifacts from EEG Data Using Morphological Component Analysis.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The influence of eye movement-related artifacts on electroencephalography (EEG) signals of human subjects, who were requested to perform a direction or viewing area dependent saccade task, was investigated by using a simultaneous recording with ocular potentials as electro-oculography (EOG). In the past, EOG artifact removals have been studied in tasks with a single fixation point in the screen center, with less attention to the sensitivity of cornea-retinal dipole orientations to the EEG head map. In the present study, we hypothesized the existence of a systematic EOG influence that differs according to coupling conditions of eye-movement directions with viewing areas including different fixation points. The effect was validated in the linear regression analysis by using 12 task conditions combining horizontal/vertical eye-movement direction and three segregated zones of gaze in the screen. In the first place, event-related potential topographic patterns were analyzed to compare the 12 conditions and propagation coefficients of the linear regression analysis were successively calculated in each condition. As a result, the EOG influences were significantly different in a large number of EEG channels, especially in the case of horizontal eye-movements. In the cross validation, the linear regression analysis using the appropriate dataset of the target direction/viewing area combination demonstrated an improved performance compared with the traditional methods using a single fixation at the center. This result may open a potential way to improve artifact correction methods by considering the systematic EOG influence that can be predicted according to the view angle such as using eye-tracker systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.