Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38784523›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2024

A simulation study: comparing independent component analysis and signal-space projection - source-informed reconstruction for rejecting muscle artifacts evoked by transcranial magnetic stimulation.

Tuomas Petteri Mutanen, Ida Ilmoniemi, Iiris Atti, Johanna Metsomaa, Risto Juhani Ilmoniemi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Clinical utility and prospective of TMS-EEG: Updated review from an international expert group.Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026
    Review
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

5 authors.

Tuomas Petteri MutanenDepartment of Neuroscience and Biomedical Engineering, Aalto University School of Science, Espoo, Finland.
Ida IlmoniemiDepartment of Neuroscience and Biomedical Engineering, Aalto University School of Science, Espoo, Finland.
Iiris AttiDepartment of Neuroscience and Biomedical Engineering, Aalto University School of Science, Espoo, Finland.
Johanna MetsomaaDepartment of Neuroscience and Biomedical Engineering, Aalto University School of Science, Espoo, Finland.
Risto Juhani IlmoniemiDepartment of Neuroscience and Biomedical Engineering, Aalto University School of Science, Espoo, Finland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The combination of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and electroencephalography (EEG) allows researchers to explore cortico-cortical connections. To study effective connections, the first few tens of milliseconds of the TMS-evoked potentials are the most critical. Yet, TMS-evoked artifacts complicate the interpretation of early-latency data. Data-processing strategies like independent component analysis (ICA) and the combined signal-space projection-source-informed reconstruction approach (SSP-SIR) are designed to mitigate artifacts, but their objective assessment is challenging because the true neuronal EEG responses under large-amplitude artifacts are generally unknown. Through simulations, we quantified how the spatiotemporal properties of the artifacts affect the cleaning performances of ICA and SSP-SIR. Methods: We simulated TMS-induced muscle artifacts and superposed them on pre-processed TMS-EEG data, serving as the ground truth. The simulated muscle artifacts were varied both in terms of their topography and temporal profiles. The signals were then cleaned using ICA and SSP-SIR, and subsequent comparisons were made with the ground truth data. Results: ICA performed better when the artifact time courses were highly variable across the trials, whereas the effectiveness of SSP-SIR depended on the congruence between the artifact and neuronal topographies, with the performance of SSP-SIR being better when difference between topographies was larger. Overall, SSP-SIR performed better than ICA across the tested conditions. Based on these simulations, SSP-SIR appears to be more effective in suppressing TMS-evoked muscle artifacts. These artifacts are shown to be highly time-locked to the TMS pulse and manifest in topographies that differ substantially from the patterns of neuronal potentials. Discussion: Selecting between ICA and SSP-SIR should be guided by the characteristics of the artifacts. SSP-SIR might be better equipped for suppressing time-locked artifacts, provided that their topographies are sufficiently different from the neuronal potential patterns of interest, and that the SSP-SIR algorithm can successfully find those artifact topographies from the high-pass-filtered data. ICA remains a powerful tool for rejecting artifacts that are not strongly time locked to the TMS pulse.

Indexed as

artifact rejectiondata analysiselectroencephalographyindependent component analysismodellingsignal-space projectionsimulationtranscranial magnetic stimulation

Identifiers

PMID38784523
PMCPMC11112076

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.