↓ Skip to main content

Validating Non-invasive EEG Source Imaging Using Optimal Electrode Configurations on a Representative Rat Head Model

Overview of attention for article published in Brain Topography, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 Mendeley
Title
Validating Non-invasive EEG Source Imaging Using Optimal Electrode Configurations on a Representative Rat Head Model
Published in
Brain Topography, March 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10548-016-0484-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pedro A. Valdés-Hernández, Jihye Bae, Yinchen Song, Akira Sumiyoshi, Eduardo Aubert-Vázquez, Jorge J. Riera

Abstract

The curtain of technical limitations impeding rat multichannel non-invasive electroencephalography (EEG) has risen. Given the importance of this preclinical model, development and validation of EEG source imaging (ESI) is essential. We investigate the validity of well-known human ESI methodologies in rats which individual tissue geometries have been approximated by those extracted from an MRI template, leading also to imprecision in electrode localizations. With the half and fifth sensitivity volumes we determine both the theoretical minimum electrode separation for non-redundant scalp EEG measurements and the electrode sensitivity resolution, which vary over the scalp because of the head geometry. According to our results, electrodes should be at least ~3 to 3.5 mm apart for an optimal configuration. The sensitivity resolution is generally worse for electrodes at the boundaries of the scalp measured region, though, by analogy with human montages, concentrates the sensitivity enough to localize sources. Cramér-Rao lower bounds of source localization errors indicate it is theoretically possible to achieve ESI accuracy at the level of anatomical structures, such as the stimulus-specific somatosensory areas, using the template. More validation for this approximation is provided through the comparison between the template and the individual lead field matrices, for several rats. Finally, using well-accepted inverse methods, we demonstrate that somatosensory ESI is not only expected but also allows exploring unknown phenomena related to global sensory integration. Inheriting the advantages and pitfalls of human ESI, rat ESI will boost the understanding of brain pathophysiological mechanisms and the evaluation of ESI methodologies, new pharmacological treatments and ESI-based biomarkers.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Cuba 1 2%
Unknown 39 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 27%
Researcher 6 15%
Student > Master 5 12%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 7%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 7 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 11 27%
Engineering 10 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 10%
Mathematics 2 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 7 17%
Unknown 6 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 December 2019.
All research outputs
#17,795,140
of 22,858,915 outputs
Outputs from Brain Topography
#342
of 487 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#206,087
of 300,631 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brain Topography
#9
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,858,915 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 487 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 300,631 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.