ReviewFrontiers in neuroergonomics2024
Reproducible machine learning research in mental workload classification using EEG.
Review in Frontiers in neuroergonomics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Machine learning performance in EEG-based mental workload classification across task types: a systematic review.Frontiers in neuroergonomics · 2025Pooled it
- Target-Session early stopping for cross-session EEG mental workload classification: a reusable deployment-oriented method.MethodsX · 2026Article
- Machine Learning Classification of Physiological Dynamics During Standardized Task-Demand Transitions.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Benchmarking Multimodal Workload Classification: Effects of Modality, Validation Protocol, and Segmentation Contrast on an Open Graded-Arithmetic Dataset.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Spatial-Temporal EEG Imaging for Dual-Loop Neuro-Adaptive Simulation: Cognitive-State Decoding and Communication Gating in Critical Human-Machine Teams.Journal of imaging · 2026Article
- SS-RIME: A Scale-Stabilized Approach to EEG Cognitive Workload Classification.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- EEG imagined speech neuro-signal preprocessing and deep learning classification.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Multivariate synchrosqueezing transform and time-frequency attention for mental workload classification from EEG signals.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- The impact of cross-validation choices on pBCI classification metrics: lessons for transparent reporting.Frontiers in neuroergonomics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study addresses concerns about reproducibility in scientific research, focusing on the use of electroencephalography (EEG) and machine learning to estimate mental workload. We established guidelines for reproducible machine learning research using EEG and used these to assess the current state of reproducibility in mental workload modeling. We first started by summarizing the current state of reproducibility efforts in machine learning and in EEG. Next, we performed a systematic literature review on Scopus, Web of Science, ACM Digital Library, and Pubmed databases to find studies about reproducibility in mental workload prediction using EEG. All of this previous work was used to formulate guidelines, which we structured along the widely recognized Cross-Industry Standard Process for Data Mining (CRISP-DM) framework. By using these guidelines, researchers can ensure transparency and comprehensiveness of their methodologies, therewith enhancing collaboration and knowledge-sharing within the scientific community, and enhancing the reliability, usability and significance of EEG and machine learning techniques in general. A second systematic literature review extracted machine learning studies that used EEG to estimate mental workload. We evaluated the reproducibility status of these studies using our guidelines. We highlight areas studied and overlooked and identify current challenges for reproducibility. Our main findings include limitations on reporting performance on unseen test data, open sharing of data and code, and reporting of resources essential for training and inference processes.
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.