ArticleBrain sciences2021
Duplicate Detection of Spike Events: A Relevant Problem in Human Single-Unit Recordings.
Article in Brain sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Detection and Removal of Hyper-synchronous Artifacts in Massively Parallel Spike Recordings.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026Article
- Electrophysiological dissociation of human posterior cingulate cortex contributions to value- and memory-based decision-making.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Human neuron activity during an 83-minute movie from 2,286 neurons and 29 patients.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Comparative analysis of spike-sorters in large-scale brainstem recordings.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
- How coupled slow oscillations, spindles and ripples coordinate neuronal processing and communication during human sleep.Nature neuroscience · 2023Article
- From End to End: Gaining, Sorting, and Employing High-Density Neural Single Unit Recordings.Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Single-unit recordings in the brain of behaving human subjects provide a unique opportunity to advance our understanding of neural mechanisms of cognition. These recordings are exclusively performed in medical centers during diagnostic or therapeutic procedures. The presence of medical instruments along with other aspects of the hospital environment limit the control of electrical noise compared to animal laboratory environments. Here, we highlight the problem of an increased occurrence of simultaneous spike events on different recording channels in human single-unit recordings. Most of these simultaneous events were detected in clusters previously labeled as artifacts and showed similar waveforms. These events may result from common external noise sources or from different micro-electrodes recording activity from the same neuron. To address the problem of duplicate recorded events, we introduce an open-source algorithm to identify these artificial spike events based on their synchronicity and waveform similarity. Applying our method to a comprehensive dataset of human single-unit recordings, we demonstrate that our algorithm can substantially increase the data quality of these recordings. Given our findings, we argue that future studies of single-unit activity recorded under noisy conditions should employ algorithms of this kind to improve data quality.
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.