ArticlePsychophysiology2025
ARTEM-IS for ERP: Agreed Reporting Template for EEG Methodology-International Standard for Event-Related Potential Experiments.
Article in Psychophysiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Variability in Preprocessing and Analysis of the Error-Related Negativity in Adult Response-Conflict Studies: A Systematic Review.Psychophysiology · 2026Pooled it
- Preprocessing choices for P3 analyses with mobile EEG: A systematic literature review and interactive exploration.Psychophysiology · 2025Pooled it
- EEG-based assessment of sustained attention in geriatric inpatients: a feasibility study.GeroScience · 2026Article
- ARTEM-IS for ERP: Agreed Reporting Template for EEG Methodology-International Standard for Event-Related Potential Experiments.Psychophysiology · 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The choices we make during the recording, preprocessing and analysis of event-related potentials (ERP) data can affect study outcomes. As such, it is critical that they are transparently reported to allow for reproducibility. Yet, systematic reviews of reporting practices in the field have shown that journal articles often do not meet this goal and that existing reporting guidelines have not resulted in a sufficient improvement in reporting transparency. An easier workflow for transparently documenting pipelines used in regular journal articles is needed. The ARTEM-IS (Agreed Reporting Template for EEG Methodology-International Standard) initiative is working towards addressing this issue by building dynamic, interactive web applications that support documenting information required by existing publication guidelines in the form of a standardized metadata template. Completing an ARTEM-IS form results in a human-reader-friendly PDF or DOCX and a machine-readable JSON summary of methodological information. This level of specificity surpasses conventional article methods sections, ensuring fewer omissions and ambiguities. These can be used as supplements to a publication, as a memory aid when writing a paper, or as records that allow easier metadata extraction. Here, we present the ARTEM-IS for ERP, which supports describing a typical ERP study, including most of its core methodological aspects (study description, experimental design, hardware, data acquisition, pre-processing, measurement, visualization, additional comments). We discuss the current functionalities of ARTEM-IS for ERP, its development via a grassroots collaborative initiative, and potential extensions (e.g., including complex designs or statistical analyses). In doing so, we highlight how widespread adoption of ARTEM-IS can benefit researchers, reviewers, and the broader scientific community by improving transparency, reducing reporting errors, and expediting rigorous replication efforts.
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.