ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2019
Simultaneous EEG-fMRI: Evaluating the Effect of the EEG Cap-Cabling Configuration on the Gradient Artifact.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 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
- Motion Artifacts Correction from Single-Channel EEG and fNIRS Signals Using Novel Wavelet Packet Decomposition in Combination with Canonical Correlation Analysis.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Electroencephalography (EEG) data recorded during simultaneous EEG-fMRI experiments are contaminated by large gradient artifacts (GA). The amplitude of the GA depends on the area of the wire loops formed by the EEG leads, as well as on the rate of switching of the magnetic field gradients, which are essential for MR imaging. Average artifact subtraction (AAS), the most commonly used method for GA correction, relies on the EEG amplifier having a large enough dynamic range to characterize the artifact voltages. Low-pass filtering (250 Hz cut-off) is generally used to attenuate the high-frequency voltage fluctuations of the GA, but even with this precaution channel saturation can occur, particularly during acquisition of high spatial resolution MRI data. Previous work has shown that the ribbon cable, used to connect the EEG cap and amplifier, makes a significant contribution to the GA, since the cable geometry produces large effective wire-loop areas. However, by appropriately connecting the wires of the ribbon cable to the EEG cap it should be possible to minimize the overall range and root mean square (RMS) amplitude of the GA by producing partial cancelation of the cap and cable contributions. Here by modifying the connections of the EEG cap to a 1 m ribbon cable we were able to reduce the range of the GA for a high-resolution coronal echo planar Imaging (EPI) acquisition by a factor of ∼ 1.6 and by a factor of ∼ 1.15 for a standard axial EPI acquisition. These changes could potentially be translated into a reduction in the required dynamic range, an increase in the EEG bandwidth or an increase in the achievable image resolution without saturation, all of which could be beneficially exploited in EEG-fMRI studies. The re-wiring could also prevent the system from saturating when small subject movements occur using the standard recording bandwidth.
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.