ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2026
Measurement Equivalence of On-Scalp OPM-MEG and Cryogenic MEG for Auditory and Somatosensory Cortical Mapping Across Development.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Wearable optically pumped magnetometer magnetoencephalography (OPM-MEG) reduces sensor-to-cortex distance compared with conventional cryogenic SQUID-MEG, but whether the two technologies yield equivalent neurophysiological conclusions remains unclear. We recorded auditory and somatosensory evoked fields in 18 participants (10-45 years) using a 128-sensor FieldLine HEDscan OPM-MEG system and a 275-channel CTF SQUID-MEG system within the same individuals. Equivalent current dipole source models were estimated using identical preprocessing and modeling procedures and compared using paired permutation testing. Both systems localized canonical auditory and somatosensory cortical generators with matched peak latencies and modest cross-system spatial differences. Auditory sources showed a consistent medial bias in SQUID-MEG localization, whereas somatosensory sources exhibited a small systematic offset (~4 mm), indicating stable coordinate differences rather than localization error. Dipole moments were larger for SQUID-MEG and goodness-of-fit higher for OPM-MEG; however, the increased moment was explained by a medial localization bias, demonstrating inverse-model effects rather than physiological disagreement. Auditory dipole moment increased with age in both systems, whereas somatosensory responses showed no age-related change. Together, these observations indicate preserved developmental physiology across platforms. These findings demonstrate that OPM-MEG and SQUID-MEG recover the same cortical generators and support equivalent biological interpretations despite predictable geometry-dependent coordinate differences. OPM-MEG therefore represents a measurement-equivalent implementation of MEG suitable for sensory functional mapping.
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.