Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34933122›Full record

ArticleNeuroImage2022

Interference suppression techniques for OPM-based MEG: Opportunities and challenges.

Robert A Seymour, Nicholas Alexander, Stephanie Mellor, George C O'Neill, Tim M Tierney, Gareth R Barnes, Eleanor A Maguire

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NeuroImage, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed
9.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 104 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Model-based cardiac field artefact correction for OP-MEG.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2026
    Article
  6. Potential ofEpilepsia open · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. SPM-30 years and beyond.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2025
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Robert A SeymourWellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, London WC1N 3AR, UK. Electronic address: rob.seymour@ucl.ac.uk.
Nicholas AlexanderWellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, London WC1N 3AR, UK.
Stephanie MellorWellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, London WC1N 3AR, UK.
George C O'NeillWellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, London WC1N 3AR, UK.
Tim M TierneyWellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, London WC1N 3AR, UK.
Gareth R BarnesWellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, London WC1N 3AR, UK.
Eleanor A MaguireWellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, London WC1N 3AR, UK. Electronic address: e.maguire@ucl.ac.uk.
National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery · GBUniversity College London · GBWellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging · GB

Funding

Department of HealthWellcome Trust 203257/Z/16/ZWellcome Trust 210567/Z/18/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

One of the primary technical challenges facing magnetoencephalography (MEG) is that the magnitude of neuromagnetic fields is several orders of magnitude lower than interfering signals. Recently, a new type of sensor has been developed - the optically pumped magnetometer (OPM). These sensors can be placed directly on the scalp and move with the head during participant movement, making them wearable. This opens up a range of exciting experimental and clinical opportunities for OPM-based MEG experiments, including paediatric studies, and the incorporation of naturalistic movements into neuroimaging paradigms. However, OPMs face some unique challenges in terms of interference suppression, especially in situations involving mobile participants, and when OPMs are integrated with electrical equipment required for naturalistic paradigms, such as motion capture systems. Here we briefly review various hardware solutions for OPM interference suppression. We then outline several signal processing strategies aimed at increasing the signal from neuromagnetic sources. These include regression-based strategies, temporal filtering and spatial filtering approaches. The focus is on the practical application of these signal processing algorithms to OPM data. In a similar vein, we include two worked-through experiments using OPM data collected from a whole-head sensor array. These tutorial-style examples illustrate how the steps for suppressing external interference can be implemented, including the associated data and code so that researchers can try the pipelines for themselves. With the popularity of OPM-based MEG rising, there will be an increasing need to deal with interference suppression. We hope this practical paper provides a resource for OPM-based MEG researchers to build upon.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsEquipment DesignHead MovementsHumansMagnetoencephalographyNeuroimagingScalpSignal Processing, Computer-AssistedBeamformerInterference suppressionMEGNoise reductionOPMSignal processing

Identifiers

PMID34933122
PMCPMC8803550
OpenAlexW3201966318

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.