↓ Skip to main content

Sensor Level Functional Connectivity Topography Comparison Between Different References Based EEG and MEG

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Sensor Level Functional Connectivity Topography Comparison Between Different References Based EEG and MEG
Published in
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, May 2018
DOI 10.3389/fnbeh.2018.00096
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yunzhi Huang, Junpeng Zhang, Yuan Cui, Gang Yang, Qi Liu, Guangfu Yin

Abstract

Sensor-level functional connectivity topography (sFCT) contributes significantly to our understanding of brain networks. sFCT can be constructed using either electroencephalography (EEG) or magnetoencephalography (MEG). Here, we compared sFCT within the EEG modality and between EEG and MEG modalities. We first used simulations to look at how different EEG references-including the Reference Electrode Standardization Technique (REST), average reference (AR), linked mastoids (LM), and left mastoid references (LR)-affect EEG-based sFCT. The results showed that REST decreased the reference effects on scalp EEG recordings, making REST-based sFCT closer to the ground truth (sFCT based on ideal recordings). For the inter-modality simulation comparisons, we compared each type of EEG-sFCT with MEG-sFCT using three metrics to quantize the differences: Relative Error (RE), Overlap Rate (OR), and Hamming Distance (HD). When two sFCTs are similar, RE and HD are low, while OR is high. Results showed that among all reference schemes, EEG-and MEG-sFCT were most similar when the EEG was REST-based and the EEG and MEG were recorded simultaneously. Next, we analyzed simultaneously recorded MEG and EEG data from publicly available face-recognition experiments using a similar procedure as in the simulations. The results showed (1) if MEG-sFCT is the standard, REST-and LM-based sFCT provided results closer to this standard in the terms of HD; (2) REST-based sFCT and MEG-sFCT had the highest similarity in terms of RE; (3) REST-based sFCT had the most overlapping edges with MEG-sFCT in terms of OR. This study thus provides new insights into the effect of different reference schemes on sFCT and the similarity between MEG and EEG in terms of sFCT.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 32%
Student > Master 3 16%
Student > Bachelor 2 11%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 5%
Lecturer 1 5%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 4 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 6 32%
Neuroscience 3 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 11%
Computer Science 1 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 5%
Other 3 16%
Unknown 3 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 22 May 2018.
All research outputs
#13,374,110
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#1,483
of 3,277 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#160,104
of 328,247 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#38
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,277 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its peers.
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 328,247 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.