↓ Skip to main content

Non-Linear Dynamical Analysis of EEG Time Series Distinguishes Patients with Parkinson’s Disease from Healthy Individuals

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
121 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
Non-Linear Dynamical Analysis of EEG Time Series Distinguishes Patients with Parkinson’s Disease from Healthy Individuals
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2013.00200
Pubmed ID
Authors

Claudia Lainscsek, Manuel E. Hernandez, Jonathan Weyhenmeyer, Terrence J. Sejnowski, Howard Poizner

Abstract

The pathophysiology of Parkinson's disease (PD) is known to involve altered patterns of neuronal firing and synchronization in cortical-basal ganglia circuits. One window into the nature of the aberrant temporal dynamics in the cerebral cortex of PD patients can come from analysis of the patients electroencephalography (EEG). Rather than using spectral-based methods, we used data models based on delay differential equations (DDE) as non-linear time-domain classification tools to analyze EEG recordings from PD patients on and off dopaminergic therapy and healthy individuals. Two sets of 50 1-s segments of 64-channel EEG activity were recorded from nine PD patients on and off medication and nine age-matched controls. The 64 EEG channels were grouped into 10 clusters covering frontal, central, parietal, and occipital brain regions for analysis. DDE models were fitted to individual trials, and model coefficients and error were used as features for classification. The best models were selected using repeated random sub-sampling validation and classification performance was measured using the area under the ROC curve A'. In a companion paper, we show that DDEs can uncover hidden dynamical structure from short segments of simulated time series of known dynamical systems in high noise regimes. Using the same method for finding the best models, we found here that even short segments of EEG data in PD patients and controls contained dynamical structure, and moreover, that PD patients exhibited a greater dynamic range than controls. DDE model output on the means from one set of 50 trials provided nearly complete separation of PD patients off medication from controls: across brain regions, the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curves, A', varied from 0.95 to 1.0. For distinguishing PD patients on vs. off medication, classification performance A' ranged from 0.86 to 1.0 across brain regions. Moreover, the generalizability of the model to the second set of 50 trials was excellent, with A' ranging from 0.81 to 0.94 across brain regions for controls vs. PD off medication, and from 0.62 to 0.82 for PD on medication vs. off. Finally, model features significantly predicted individual patients' motor severity, as assessed with standard clinical rating scales.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 121 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
United States 2 2%
Italy 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 113 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 18%
Researcher 20 17%
Professor 13 11%
Student > Bachelor 13 11%
Student > Master 12 10%
Other 14 12%
Unknown 27 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 31 26%
Neuroscience 18 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 6%
Psychology 6 5%
Other 22 18%
Unknown 30 25%
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 11 December 2013.
All research outputs
#20,213,623
of 22,736,112 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#8,644
of 11,645 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#248,822
of 280,808 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#117
of 210 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,736,112 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,645 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 280,808 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 210 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.