Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37698464›Full record

ArticleeLife2023

Bayesian analysis of phase data in EEG and MEG.

Sydney Dimmock, Cian O'Donnell, Conor Houghton

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in eLife, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Sydney DimmockFaculty of Engineering, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0163-2048
Cian O'DonnellFaculty of Engineering, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-2031-9177
Conor HoughtonFaculty of Engineering, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-5017-9473
University of Bristol · GBUniversity of Ulster · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/S026630/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Electroencephalography and magnetoencephalography recordings are non-invasive and temporally precise, making them invaluable tools in the investigation of neural responses in humans. However, these recordings are noisy, both because the neuronal electrodynamics involved produces a muffled signal and because the neuronal processes of interest compete with numerous other processes, from blinking to day-dreaming. One fruitful response to this noisiness has been to use stimuli with a specific frequency and to look for the signal of interest in the response at that frequency. Typically this signal involves measuring the coherence of response phase: here, a Bayesian approach to measuring phase coherence is described. This Bayesian approach is illustrated using two examples from neurolinguistics and its properties are explored using simulated data. We suggest that the Bayesian approach is more descriptive than traditional statistical approaches because it provides an explicit, interpretable generative model of how the data arises. It is also more data-efficient: it detects stimulus-related differences for smaller participant numbers than the standard approach.

Indexed as

ElectroencephalographyMagnetoencephalographyBayes TheoremHumansNoiseBayesiancircular statisticsEEGfrequency-tagginghumanMEGneurolinguisticsneuroscience

Identifiers

PMID37698464
PMCPMC10588985
OpenAlexW4386624749

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.