Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27498370›Full record

ArticleNeuroImage2016

A study of the electro-haemodynamic coupling using simultaneously acquired intracranial EEG and fMRI data in humans.

T Murta, L Hu, T M Tierney, U J Chaudhary, M C Walker, D W Carmichael, P Figueiredo, L Lemieux

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NeuroImage, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. EEG-Informed fMRI: A Review of Data Analysis Methods.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2018
    Review
  11. A novel scheme for the validation of an automated classification method for epileptic spikes by comparison with multiple observers.Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2017
    Article
  12. 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

8 authors.

T MurtaDept. of Clinical and Experimental Epilepsy, UCL Institute of Neurology, London, United Kingdom; Institute for Systems and Robotics and Department of Bioengineering, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal. Electronic address: tigoncalvesmurta@gmail.com.
L HuKey Laboratory of Mental Health, Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.
T M TierneyUCL Institute of Child Heath, London, United Kingdom.
U J ChaudharyDept. of Clinical and Experimental Epilepsy, UCL Institute of Neurology, London, United Kingdom.
M C WalkerDept. of Clinical and Experimental Epilepsy, UCL Institute of Neurology, London, United Kingdom.
D W CarmichaelUCL Institute of Child Heath, London, United Kingdom.
P FigueiredoInstitute for Systems and Robotics and Department of Bioengineering, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal.
L LemieuxDept. of Clinical and Experimental Epilepsy, UCL Institute of Neurology, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

Medical Research Council G0200216Medical Research Council G0301067
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In current fMRI studies designed to map BOLD changes related to interictal epileptiform discharges (IED), which are recorded on simultaneous EEG, the information contained in the morphology and field extent of the EEG events is exclusively used for their classification. Usually, a BOLD predictor based on IED onset times alone is constructed, effectively treating all events as identical. We used intracranial EEG (icEEG)-fMRI data simultaneously recorded in humans to investigate the effect of including any of the features: amplitude, width (duration), slope of the rising phase, energy (area under the curve), or spatial field extent (number of contacts over which the sharp wave was observed) of the fast wave of the IED (the sharp wave), into the BOLD model, to better understand the neurophysiological origin of sharp wave-related BOLD changes, in the immediate vicinity of the recording contacts. Among the features considered, the width was the only one found to explain a significant amount of additional variance, suggesting that the amplitude of the BOLD signal depends more on the duration of the underlying field potential (reflected in the sharp wave width) than on the degree of neuronal activity synchrony (reflected in the sharp wave amplitude), and, consequently, that including inter-event variations of the sharp wave width in the BOLD signal model may increase the sensitivity of forthcoming EEG-fMRI studies of epileptic activity.

Indexed as

AdultBrainDrug Resistant EpilepsyElectroencephalographyElectroencephalography Phase SynchronizationFunctional NeuroimagingHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingNeurovascular CouplingBOLDElectro-haemodynamic couplingfMRIIntracranial EEGSharp wave

Identifiers

PMID27498370
PMCPMC5102699

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.