ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2023
An F-ratio-based method for estimating the number of active sources in MEG.
Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Inferring neural sources from electroencephalography: foundations and frontiers.Journal of neural engineering · 2026Review
- Flexible Alternating Projection for Spatially Extended Brain Source Localization.IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2025Article
- Evaluation and Characterization of High-Uniformity SiNMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Localization of Realistic Spatial Patches of Complex Source Activity in MEG and EEG.IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society · 2025Article
- LOCALIZATION OF SPATIALLY EXTENDED BRAIN SOURCES BY FLEXIBLE ALTERNATING PROJECTION (FLEX-AP).bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Magnetoencephalography (MEG) is a powerful technique for studying the human brain function. However, accurately estimating the number of sources that contribute to the MEG recordings remains a challenging problem due to the low signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), the presence of correlated sources, inaccuracies in head modeling, and variations in individual anatomy. Methods: To address these issues, our study introduces a robust method for accurately estimating the number of active sources in the brain based on the F-ratio statistical approach, which allows for a comparison between a full model with a higher number of sources and a reduced model with fewer sources. Using this approach, we developed a formal statistical procedure that sequentially increases the number of sources in the multiple dipole localization problem until all sources are found. Results: Our results revealed that the selection of thresholds plays a critical role in determining the method's overall performance, and appropriate thresholds needed to be adjusted for the number of sources and SNR levels, while they remained largely invariant to different inter-source correlations, translational modeling inaccuracies, and different cortical anatomies. By identifying optimal thresholds and validating our F-ratio-based method in simulated, real phantom, and human MEG data, we demonstrated the superiority of our F-ratio-based method over existing state-of-the-art statistical approaches, such as the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) and Minimum Description Length (MDL). Discussion: Overall, when tuned for optimal selection of thresholds, our method offers researchers a precise tool to estimate the true number of active brain sources and accurately model brain function.
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.