ArticleNeurophotonics2023
Impact of averaging fNIRS regional coherence data when monitoring people with long term post-concussion symptoms.
Article in Neurophotonics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Direct Evidence for the Feedforward Neurovascular Coupling Mechanism in Humans During Task Onset: An EEG-fNIRS-TCD Multimodal Imaging Study.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Analytical pipeline optimisation in developmental fNIRS hyperscanning data: Neural coherence between 4- to 6-year old children collaborating with their mothers.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Article
- Disentangling the impact of motion artifact correction algorithms on functional near-infrared spectroscopy-based brain network analysis.Neurophotonics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Significance: Functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS), with its measure of delta hemoglobin concentration, has shown promise as a monitoring tool for the functional assessment of neurological disorders and brain injury. Analysis of fNIRS data often involves averaging data from several channel pairs in a region. Although this greatly reduces the processing time, it is uncertain how it affects the ability to detect changes post injury. Aim: We aimed to determine how averaging data within regions impacts the ability to differentiate between post-concussion and healthy controls. Approach: We compared interhemispheric coherence data from 16 channel pairs across the left and right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex during a task and a rest period. We compared the statistical power for differentiating groups that was obtained when undertaking no averaging, vs. averaging data from 2, 4, or 8 source detector pairs. Results: Coherence was significantly reduced in the concussion group compared with controls when no averaging was undertaken. Averaging all 8 channel pairs before undertaking the coherence analysis resulted in no group differences. Conclusions: Averaging between fiber pairs may eliminate the ability to detect group differences. It is proposed that even adjacent fiber pairs may have unique information, so averaging must be done with caution when monitoring brain disorders or injury.
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.