Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34065136›Full record

ReviewBrain sciences2021

Data Processing in Functional Near-Infrared Spectroscopy (fNIRS) Motor Control Research.

Patrick W Dans, Stevie D Foglia, Aimee J Nelson

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brain sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. HRNeurophotonics · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Multimodal Neural Assessment for Predicting Post-Stroke Dysphagia: Identifying Critical Risk Factors Using Combined Indicators.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Muscular and Prefrontal Cortex Activity during Dual-Task Performing in Young Adults.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2023
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  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

3 authors.

Patrick W DansDepartment of Kinesiology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-1232-2440
Stevie D FogliaSchool of Biomedical Engineering, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-2004-6287
Aimee J NelsonDepartment of Kinesiology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1, Canada.

Funding

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada RGPIN-2015-06309
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

FNIRS pre-processing and processing methodologies are very important-how a researcher chooses to process their data can change the outcome of an experiment. The purpose of this review is to provide a guide on fNIRS pre-processing and processing techniques pertinent to the field of human motor control research. One hundred and twenty-three articles were selected from the motor control field and were examined on the basis of their fNIRS pre-processing and processing methodologies. Information was gathered about the most frequently used techniques in the field, which included frequency cutoff filters, wavelet filters, smoothing filters, and the general linear model (GLM). We discuss the methodologies of and considerations for these frequently used techniques, as well as those for some alternative techniques. Additionally, general considerations for processing are discussed.

Indexed as

data processingfNIRSfunctional near-infrared spectroscopymotor controlprocessing techniques

Identifiers

PMID34065136
PMCPMC8151801

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.