Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31234599›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2019

Validation of Electroencephalographic Recordings Obtained with a Consumer-Grade, Single Dry Electrode, Low-Cost Device: A Comparative Study.

Héctor Rieiro, Carolina Diaz-Piedra, José Miguel Morales, Andrés Catena, Samuel Romero, Joaquin Roca-Gonzalez, Luis J Fuentes, Leandro L Di Stasi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing 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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Fully 3D-Printed Dry EEG Electrodes.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Héctor RieiroDepartment of Signal Theory and Communications, University of Vigo, 36310 Vigo, Spain. hrieiro@ugr.es.ORCID 0000-0002-4312-9432
Carolina Diaz-PiedraMind, Brain, and Behavior Research Center, University of Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain. dipie@ugr.es.ORCID 0000-0002-8168-2546
José Miguel MoralesMind, Brain, and Behavior Research Center, University of Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain. jmmorales@ugr.es.ORCID 0000-0002-5773-0368
Andrés CatenaMind, Brain, and Behavior Research Center, University of Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain. acatena@ugr.es.
Samuel RomeroDepartment of Computer Architecture and Technology, University of Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain. sromero@ugr.es.
Joaquin Roca-GonzalezDepartment of Bioengineering, Technical University of Cartagena, 30202 Cartagena, Spain. jroca.gonzalez@upct.es.
Luis J FuentesDepartment of Basic Psychology and Methodology, University of Murcia, 30100 Murcia, Spain. lfuentes@um.es.ORCID 0000-0002-3203-9976
Leandro L Di StasiMind, Brain, and Behavior Research Center, University of Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain. distasi@ugr.es.

Funding

Spanish Department of Transportation SPIP2014-1426
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The functional validity of the signal obtained with low-cost electroencephalography (EEG) devices is still under debate. Here, we have conducted an in-depth comparison of the EEG-recordings obtained with a medical-grade golden-cup electrodes ambulatory device, the SOMNOwatch + EEG-6, vs those obtained with a consumer-grade, single dry electrode low-cost device, the NeuroSky MindWave, one of the most affordable devices currently available. We recorded EEG signals at Fp1 using the two different devices simultaneously on 21 participants who underwent two experimental phases: a 12-minute resting state task (alternating two cycles of closed/open eyes periods), followed by 60-minute virtual-driving task. We evaluated the EEG recording quality by comparing the similarity between the temporal data series, their spectra, their signal-to-noise ratio, the reliability of EEG measurements (comparing the closed eyes periods), as well as their blink detection rate. We found substantial agreement between signals: whereas, qualitatively, the NeuroSky MindWave presented higher levels of noise and a biphasic shape of blinks, the similarity metric indicated that signals from both recording devices were significantly correlated. While the NeuroSky MindWave was less reliable, both devices had a similar blink detection rate. Overall, the NeuroSky MindWave is noise-limited, but provides stable recordings even through long periods of time. Furthermore, its data would be of adequate quality compared to that of conventional wet electrode EEG devices, except for a potential calibration error and spectral differences at low frequencies.

Indexed as

AdultBrainElectrodesElectroencephalographyFemaleHumansMaleReproducibility of ResultsSignal-To-Noise RatioYoung Adultbrain activitydriving simulatorelectroencephalographylow-cost wearablesNeuroSky® MindWave Mobile headset

Identifiers

PMID31234599
PMCPMC6630628

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.