ArticleImaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)
Multi-site harmonization for magnetoencephalography spectral power data.
Article in Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The ENIGMA MEG Pipeline: Automated cortically localized spectral analysis of multi-site resting state MEG datasets.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- A linked independent component analysis framework for characterizing site-effect patterns in multi-site structural and functional MRI.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A known issue with multi-site studies is the presence of site-specific effects that may confound effects of interest. These effects may be additive, multiplicative, or both. Numerous strategies have been developed and tested on microarray data from multiple batches, structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), diffusion tensor imaging (DTI), and functional MRI (fMRI). Multi-site magnetoencephalography (MEG) data represent a unique problem, however. The major MEG platforms differ substantially in sensor geometry, sensor layout, and noise-cancellation strategy, all of which may affect the distribution of the data. Another factor to consider in harmonization is retention of the relationship between the data and any covariates of interest. These relationships may be nonlinear, and individual sites may differ in the distribution of covariates. In this report, we test several previously developed methods for harmonization on a set of 16 open access datasets. We investigated ComBat, which uses empirical Bayes to improve model estimation; GAM-ComBat (Neuroharmonize), which extends ComBat to incorporate generalized additive modeling of the covariates of interest; CovBat (with the GAM extension), which performs a second round of ComBat harmonization to harmonize the covariance; and RELIEF, a matrix factorization technique. We found that overall, GAM-ComBat was the best choice for harmonizing the data while retaining the nonlinear dependence of the data on covariates of interest such as age. We demonstrate that harmonization of MEG data is possible and should be an integral part of any multi-site study.
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.