ArticleNeuroImage2022
Good scientific practice in EEG and MEG research: Progress and perspectives.
Article in NeuroImage, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 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
20 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cerebellar Electrical Activity as a Marker for Predicting Brain Health and Disease: A Review.Brain sciences · 2026Review
- NeuroStat: An Open-Source EEG Connectivity Platform for Randomised Controlled Trials.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- ARTEM-IS for ERP: Agreed Reporting Template for EEG Methodology-International Standard for Event-Related Potential Experiments.Psychophysiology · 2025Article
- Review
- The Virtual Parkinsonian patient.NPJ systems biology and applications · 2025Article
- Article
- The Practical Implications of Re-Referencing in ERP Studies: The Case of N400 in the Picture-Word Verification Task.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Measuring Realistic Emotional Perception With EEG: A Comparison of Multimodal Videos and Naturalistic Scenes.Psychophysiology · 2025Article
- A standardized framework to test event-based experiments.Behavior research methods · 2024Article
- Exploring Brain Activity in Different Mental Cognitive Workloads.Iranian journal of psychiatry · 2024Article
- Optimizing spatial specificity and signal quality in fNIRS: an overview of potential challenges and possible options for improving the reliability of real-time applications.Frontiers in neuroergonomics · 2024Review
- Recent trends in multiple metrics and multimodal analysis for neural activity and pupillometry.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
- Examining the influence of self-care practices on brain activity in healthy older adults.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2024Article
- Heterogeneity and convergence across seven neuroimaging modalities: a review of the autism spectrum disorder literature.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2024Review
- Reproducible brain PET data analysis: easier said than done.Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2024Article
- Managing EEG studies: How to prepare and what to do once data collection has begun.Psychophysiology · 2023Article
- A Novel OpenBCI Framework for EEG-Based Neurophysiological Experiments.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Using preregistration as a tool for transparent fNIRS study design.Neurophotonics · 2023Article
- Review
- Rhythms in cognition: The evidence revisited.The European journal of neuroscience · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
26 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Good scientific practice (GSP) refers to both explicit and implicit rules, recommendations, and guidelines that help scientists to produce work that is of the highest quality at any given time, and to efficiently share that work with the community for further scrutiny or utilization. For experimental research using magneto- and electroencephalography (MEEG), GSP includes specific standards and guidelines for technical competence, which are periodically updated and adapted to new findings. However, GSP also needs to be regularly revisited in a broader light. At the LiveMEEG 2020 conference, a reflection on GSP was fostered that included explicitly documented guidelines and technical advances, but also emphasized intangible GSP: a general awareness of personal, organizational, and societal realities and how they can influence MEEG research. This article provides an extensive report on most of the LiveMEEG contributions and new literature, with the additional aim to synthesize ongoing cultural changes in GSP. It first covers GSP with respect to cognitive biases and logical fallacies, pre-registration as a tool to avoid those and other early pitfalls, and a number of resources to enable collaborative and reproducible research as a general approach to minimize misconceptions. Second, it covers GSP with respect to data acquisition, analysis, reporting, and sharing, including new tools and frameworks to support collaborative work. Finally, GSP is considered in light of ethical implications of MEEG research and the resulting responsibility that scientists have to engage with societal challenges. Considering among other things the benefits of peer review and open access at all stages, the need to coordinate larger international projects, the complexity of MEEG subject matter, and today's prioritization of fairness, privacy, and the environment, we find that current GSP tends to favor collective and cooperative work, for both scientific and for societal reasons.
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.