Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41013007›Full record

SynthesisSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025

A Systematic Review of Techniques for Artifact Detection and Artifact Category Identification in Electroencephalography from Wearable Devices.

Pasquale Arpaia, Matteo De Luca, Lucrezia Di Marino, Dunja Duran, Ludovica Gargiulo, Paola Lanteri, Nicola Moccaldi, Marco Nalin, Mauro Picciafuoco, Rachele Robbio and 1 more

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. 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

11 authors.

Pasquale ArpaiaDepartment of Electrical Engineering and Information Technology (DIETI), University of Naples Federico II, 80131 Naples, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-5192-5922
Matteo De LucaDepartment of Electrical Engineering and Information Technology (DIETI), University of Naples Federico II, 80131 Naples, Italy.
Lucrezia Di MarinoDepartment of Electrical Engineering and Information Technology (DIETI), University of Naples Federico II, 80131 Naples, Italy.ORCID 0009-0009-9515-2923
Dunja DuranEpileptology Unit, Magnetoencephalography Laboratory, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Neurologico Carlo Besta, 20133 Milan, Italy.
Ludovica GargiuloInstitute of Industrial Technologies and Automation, National Council of Research (STIIMA-CNR), 20133 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-3305-2515
Paola LanteriNeurophysiology Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Neurologico Carlo Besta, 20133 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-7561-7724
Nicola MoccaldiDepartment of Electrical Engineering and Information Technology (DIETI), University of Naples Federico II, 80131 Naples, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-1035-5740
Marco Nalinab medica S.p.A., 20023 Cerro Maggiore, Italy.
Mauro Picciafuocoab medica S.p.A., 20023 Cerro Maggiore, Italy.
Rachele RobbioDepartment of Electrical Engineering and Information Technology (DIETI), University of Naples Federico II, 80131 Naples, Italy.
Elisa VisaniEpileptology Unit, Magnetoencephalography Laboratory, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Neurologico Carlo Besta, 20133 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-1399-2630

Funding

Italian Ministry of Universities and Research (MUR) PNC0000007Ministry of Enterprise and Made in Italy (MIMI) B69J23001290005
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Wearable electroencephalography (EEG) enables brain monitoring in real-world environments beyond clinical settings; however, the relaxed constraints of the acquisition setup often compromise signal quality. This review examines methods for artifact detection and for the identification of artifact categories (e.g., ocular) and specific sources (e.g., eye blink) in wearable EEG. A systematic search was conducted across six databases using the query: ("electroencephalographic" OR "electroencephalography" OR "EEG") AND ("Artifact detection" OR "Artifact identification" OR "Artifact removal" OR "Artifact rejection") AND "wearable". Following PRISMA guidelines, 58 studies were included. Artifacts in wearable EEG exhibit specific features due to dry electrodes, reduced scalp coverage, and subject mobility, yet only a few studies explicitly address these peculiarities. Most pipelines integrate detection and removal phases but rarely separate their impact on performance metrics, mainly accuracy (71%) when the clean signal is the reference and selectivity (63%), assessed with respect to physiological signal. Wavelet transforms and ICA, often using thresholding as a decision rule, are among the most frequently used techniques for managing ocular and muscular artifacts. ASR-based pipelines are widely applied for ocular, movement, and instrumental artifacts. Deep learning approaches are emerging, especially for muscular and motion artifacts, with promising applications in real-time settings. Auxiliary sensors (e.g., IMUs) are still underutilized despite their potential in enhancing artifact detection under ecological conditions. Only two studies addressed artifact category identification. A mapping of validated pipelines per artifact type and a survey of public datasets are provided to support benchmarking and reproducibility.

Indexed as

ArtifactsElectroencephalographyWearable Electronic DevicesBrainHumansSignal Processing, Computer-Assistedartifact detectionartifact identificationartifact removalEEGwearable

Identifiers

PMID41013007
PMCPMC12473706

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.