Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35995976›Full record

ArticleCommunications biology2022

Brainprints: identifying individuals from magnetoencephalograms.

Shenghao Wu, Aaditya Ramdas, Leila Wehbe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Communications biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Shenghao WuNeuroscience Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Aaditya RamdasMachine Learning Department, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Leila WehbeNeuroscience Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. lwehbe@cmu.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-8545-2062

Funding

Mapping the Human Connectome: Structure, Function, and HeritabilityU54MH091657 · NIMH · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI UGURBIL, KAMIL, VAN ESSEN, DAVID C · 2010 to 2014
$34.7M
Interdiscplinary Training in Computational NeuroscienceR90DA023426 · NIDA · CARNEGIE-MELLON UNIVERSITY · PI KASS, ROBERT E, RUBIN, JONATHAN E. · 2006 to 2020
$4.5M
NIDA NIH HHS R90 DA023426NIMH NIH HHS U54 MH091657
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Magnetoencephalography (MEG) is used to study a wide variety of cognitive processes. Increasingly, researchers are adopting principles of open science and releasing their MEG data. While essential for reproducibility, sharing MEG data has unforeseen privacy risks. Individual differences may make a participant identifiable from their anonymized recordings. However, our ability to identify individuals based on these individual differences has not yet been assessed. Here, we propose interpretable MEG features to characterize individual difference. We term these features brainprints (brain fingerprints). We show through several datasets that brainprints accurately identify individuals across days, tasks, and even between MEG and Electroencephalography (EEG). Furthermore, we identify consistent brainprint components that are important for identification. We study the dependence of identifiability on the amount of data available. We also relate identifiability to the level of preprocessing and the experimental task. Our findings reveal specific aspects of individual variability in MEG. They also raise concerns about unregulated sharing of brain data, even if anonymized.

Indexed as

Brain MappingMagnetoencephalographyBrainElectroencephalographyHumansReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID35995976
PMCPMC9395342

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.