Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41732700›Full record

ArticleMethodsX2026

Comparison of preprocessing techniques for effective cognitive analysis using electroencephalography (EEG).

Keerthika N, Kiruthika V

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in MethodsX, 2026. 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. 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

2 authors.

Keerthika NSchool of Electronics Engineering, Vellore Institute of Technology, Chennai 600127 Tamil Nadu, India.
Kiruthika VSchool of Electronics Engineering, Vellore Institute of Technology, Chennai 600127 Tamil Nadu, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Electroencephalography (EEG) serves as a significant technique to analyze the cognition. The purpose of this study is to compare EEG preprocessing techniques and identify the most suitable pipeline for reliable analysis of cognitive processing in sports and non-sports group. The study attempts the preprocessing of the EEG signal in active states from both groups using two methods. • The first method (Method A) called TRIM-EEG (Tri State Method) is an amalgamation of techniques that include filtering using notch, ocular artifact removal using Independent Component Analysis (ICA), and frequency selection using bandpass filtering. • The second method (Method B) uses the Variational Decomposition Mode (VMD) technique, which decomposes the signal and its parameters were selected using Shuffled Frog Leaping Algorithm (SfLA) with spectral kurtosis. Error metrics were used to analyze the performance and TRIM-EEG had better values. The resultant preprocessed EEG signal yielded by the TRIM-EEG method was subjected to a broad feature analysis to differentiate between sports and non-sports groups using five different classifiers. Support Vector Machine (SVM) and Random Forest (RF) yielded higher accuracy 93.33 %. The performance of classifiers and the comparative analysis of EEG preprocessing demonstrates that TRIM-EEG method can be used as an effective technique in cognitive analysis studies.

Indexed as

Cognitive abilityElectroencephalography (EEG)Machine learningPreprocessing

Identifiers

PMID41732700
PMCPMC12925476

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.