ArticleeNeuro2025
EEG Data Quality in Large-Scale Field Studies in India and Tanzania.
Article in eNeuro, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Electroencephalography (EEG) and the Quest for an Inclusive and Global Neuroscience.The European journal of neuroscience · 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
40 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is a growing imperative to understand the neurophysiological impact of our rapidly changing and diverse technological, social, chemical, and physical environments. To untangle the multidimensional and interacting effects requires data at scale across diverse populations, taking measurement out of a controlled lab environment and into the field. Electroencephalography (EEG), which has correlates with various environmental factors as well as cognitive and mental health outcomes, has the advantage of both portability and cost-effectiveness for this purpose. However, with numerous field researchers spread across diverse locations, data quality issues and researcher idle time due to insufficient participants can quickly become unmanageable and expensive problems. In programs we have established in India and Tanzania, we demonstrate that with appropriate training, structured teams, and daily automated analysis and feedback on data quality, nonspecialists can reliably collect EEG data alongside various survey and assessments with consistently high throughput and quality. Over a 30 week period, research teams were able to maintain an average of 25.6 participants per week, collecting data from a diverse sample of 7,933 participants ranging from Hadzabe hunter-gatherers to office workers. Furthermore, data quality, computed on the first 5,831 records using two common methods, PREP and FASTER, was comparable to benchmark datasets from controlled lab conditions. Altogether this resulted in a cost per participant of under $50, a fraction of the cost typical of such data collection, opening up the possibility for large-scale programs particularly in low- and middle-income countries.
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.