ArticleJournal of neural engineering2020
Signal recovery from stimulation artifacts in intracranial recordings with dictionary learning.
Article in Journal of neural engineering, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- logLIRA: a method for reliable suppression of electrical stimulation artifacts enabling short-latency neural response recovery.Journal of neural engineering · 2026Article
- Clinical utility of evoked potentials for programming subthalamic deep brain stimulation in Parkinsons disease.NPJ Parkinson's disease · 2026Review
- Multimodal evaluation of network activity and optogenetic interventions in human hippocampal slices.Nature neuroscience · 2024Article
- Spike sorting in the presence of stimulation artifacts: a dynamical control systems approach.Journal of neural engineering · 2024Article
- Development and Evaluation of a Real-Time Phase-Triggered Stimulation Algorithm for the CorTec Brain Interchange.IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society · 2024Article
- Single-pulse electrical stimulation artifact removal using the novel matching pursuit-based artifact reconstruction and removal method (MPARRM).Journal of neural engineering · 2023Article
- Imaging the effective networks associated with cortical function through intracranial high-frequency stimulation.Human brain mapping · 2022Article
- Advanced Bioelectrical Signal Processing Methods: Past, Present and Future Approach-Part II: Brain Signals.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Uncovering biomarkers during therapeutic neuromodulation with PARRM: Period-based Artifact Reconstruction and Removal Method.Cell reports methods · 2021Article
- Energy-Efficient Integrated Circuit Solutions Toward Miniaturized Closed-Loop Neural Interface Systems.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2021Review
- Investigating Nuisance Effects Induced in EEG During tACS Application.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2021Article
- Intraoperative Characterization of Subthalamic Nucleus-to-Cortex Evoked Potentials in Parkinson's Disease Deep Brain Stimulation.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveElectrical stimulation of the human brain is commonly used for eliciting and inhibiting neural activity for clinical diagnostics, modifying abnormal neural circuit function for therapeutics, and interrogating cortical connectivity. However, recording electrical signals with concurrent stimulation results in dominant electrical artifacts that mask the neural signals of interest. Here we develop a method to reproducibly and robustly recover neural activity during concurrent stimulation. We concentrate on signal recovery across an array of electrodes without channel-wise fine-tuning of the algorithm. Our goal includes signal recovery with trains of stimulation pulses, since repeated, high-frequency pulses are often required to induce desired effects in both therapeutic and research domains. We have made all of our code and data publicly available. APPROACH: We developed an algorithm that automatically detects templates of artifacts across many channels of recording, creating a dictionary of learned templates using unsupervised clustering. The artifact template that best matches each individual artifact pulse is subtracted to recover the underlying activity. To assess the success of our method, we focus on whether it extracts physiologically interpretable signals from real recordings. MAIN
resultsWe demonstrate our signal recovery approach on invasive electrophysiologic recordings from human subjects during stimulation. We show the recovery of meaningful neural signatures in both electrocorticographic (ECoG) arrays and deep brain stimulation (DBS) recordings. In addition, we compared cortical responses induced by the stimulation of primary somatosensory (S1) by natural peripheral touch, as well as motor cortex activity with and without concurrent S1 stimulation. SIGNIFICANCE: Our work will enable future advances in neural engineering with simultaneous stimulation and recording.
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.