ArticleBrain and neuroscience advances
In search for the most optimal EEG method: A practical evaluation of a water-based electrode EEG system.
Article in Brain and neuroscience advances. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparing aperiodic activity in consumer-grade and research-grade EEG: Reliability and association with mathematical ability.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- Feasibility and Usability of Home-Based Visual Evoked Potential Electroencephalogram in Neurological Telemonitoring Research.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2026Article
- Enhancing migraine care and research through Telemedicine and telemonitoring: E-diary tracking and home EEG.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2025Article
- Evaluation of a New Lightweight EEG Technology for Translational Applications of Passive Brain-Computer Interfaces.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2022Article
- In search for the most optimal EEG method: A practical evaluation of a water-based electrode EEG system.Brain and neuroscience advancesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The study assessed a mobile electroencephalography system with water-based electrodes for its applicability in cognitive and behavioural neuroscience. It was compared to a standard gel-based wired system. Electroencephalography was recorded on two occasions (first with gel-based, then water-based system) as participants completed the flanker task. Technical and practical considerations for the application of the water-based system are reported based on participant and experimenter experiences. Empirical comparisons focused on electroencephalography data noise levels, frequency power across four bands (theta, alpha, low beta and high beta) and event-related components (P300 and ERN). The water-based system registered more noise compared to the gel-based system which resulted in increased loss of data during artefact rejection. Signal-to-noise ratio was significantly lower for the water-based system in the parietal channels which affected the observed parietal beta power. It also led to a shift in topography of the maximal P300 activity from parietal to frontal regions. The water-based system may be prone to slow drift noise which may affect the reliability and consistency of low-frequency band analyses. Practical considerations for the use of water-based electrode electroencephalography systems are provided.
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.