ArticleBiological cybernetics2026
The effect of data preprocessing on spike correlation analysis results.
Article in Biological cybernetics, 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In recent years, an increasing number of large electrophysiological data sets have become publicly available, thereby providing researchers with the opportunity to analyze spike train data without conducting their own experiments. While this is undoubtedly a positive development, it increases the need for proper documentation on how the data were collected and what preprocessing was performed on the data, since interpreting analysis results in ignorance of these pieces of information can lead to wrong conclusions. An important preprocessing step is the removal of artifacts from the recordings. Electrophysiological recordings are particularly susceptible to electrical cross-talks between recording channels, resulting in artifact spikes that are coincident in multiple channels on the time scale of the data sampling rate, i.e., 1/30 ms in popular setups. The removal by signal whitening is only possible if also the raw sampled data are available, thus to eliminate this type of artifact is to remove all coincident spikes on the recording time scale to definitely avoid artifact spikes. However, given the lack of the "ground truth", this step has the potential to eliminate, in conjunction with the artifacts, components of the data that are pertinent to the research objective. In this study, we use a modified version of the Unitary Event Analysis and demonstrate that such preprocessing results in significantly lower correlations than expected by chance even on longer time scales. We also propose a method to correct for the bias introduced by this preprocessing. Thus, slight changes in the preprocessing have potentially strong impact on analysis results and methods need to consider these effects.
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.