ReviewPsychophysiology2026
Preprocessing on the Go: Practices in Gait-Related Mobile EEG.
Review in Psychophysiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Preprocessing on the Go: Practices in Gait-Related Mobile EEG.Psychophysiology · 2026Review
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
Abstract
Mobile EEG has become popular in investigating brain dynamics during gait in recent years. Within this development, new preprocessing pipelines have been introduced and refined. The diversity of approaches, however, complicates comparisons across studies. To provide clarity, we reviewed studies that combined mobile EEG with gait measurements to map the preprocessing pipelines used in the field. Our review identified substantial heterogeneity in pipeline steps, their order, combinations, and the level of reporting detail. We visualized this heterogeneity as a map, tracing pathways from raw data to outcomes such as Power spectral density (PSD), Event-related spectral perturbations (ERSP), Event-related (de-) synchronization (ERD/ERS), and Corticomuscular coherence (CMC), along with a subsequent analysis highlighting unique pipelines. Notably, artifact rejection varied across studies in both the tools used and reporting practices. While differences in hardware, setup, and experimental paradigms can justify this variability, they also challenge comparability across findings. These results emphasize the need for transparent reporting standards and provide a foundation for future efforts toward developing shared standards in the mobile EEG community.
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.