ArticleHuman brain mapping2019
Exploring the relative efficacy of motion artefact correction techniques for EEG data acquired during simultaneous fMRI.
Article in Human brain mapping, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artifact Reduction in Simultaneous EEG-fMRI: A Systematic Review of Methods and Contemporary Usage.Frontiers in neurology · 2021Pooled it
- Simultaneous EEG-fMRI: What Have We Learned and What Does the Future Hold?Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Unified Retrospective EEG Motion Educated Artefact Suppression for EEG-fMRI to Suppress Magnetic Field Gradient Artefacts During Motion.Brain topography · 2021Article
- Automated pipeline for EEG artifact reduction (APPEAR) recorded during fMRI.Journal of neural engineering · 2021Article
- Article
- Article
- Exploring the relative efficacy of motion artefact correction techniques for EEG data acquired during simultaneous fMRI.Human brain mapping · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Simultaneous EEG-fMRI allows multiparametric characterisation of brain function, in principle enabling a more complete understanding of brain responses; unfortunately the hostile MRI environment severely reduces EEG data quality. Simply eliminating data segments containing gross motion artefacts [MAs] (generated by movement of the EEG system and head in the MRI scanner's static magnetic field) was previously believed sufficient. However recently the importance of removal of all MAs has been highlighted and new methods developed. A systematic comparison of the ability to remove MAs and retain underlying neuronal activity using different methods of MA detection and post-processing algorithms is needed to guide the neuroscience community. Using a head phantom, we recorded MAs while simultaneously monitoring the motion using three different approaches: Reference Layer Artefact Subtraction (RLAS), Moiré Phase Tracker (MPT) markers and Wire Loop Motion Sensors (WLMS). These EEG recordings were combined with EEG responses to simple visual tasks acquired on a subject outside the MRI environment. MAs were then corrected using the motion information collected with each of the methods combined with different analysis pipelines. All tested methods retained the neuronal signal. However, often the MA was not removed sufficiently to allow accurate detection of the underlying neuronal signal. We show that the MA is best corrected using the RLAS combined with post-processing using a multichannel, recursive least squares (M-RLS) algorithm. This method needs to be developed further to enable practical utility; thus, WLMS combined with M-RLS currently provides the best compromise between EEG data quality and practicalities of motion detection.
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.