↓ Skip to main content

Interference of tonic muscle activity on the EEG: a single motor unit study

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, July 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 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
Interference of tonic muscle activity on the EEG: a single motor unit study
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, July 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00504
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gizem Yilmaz, Pekcan Ungan, Oğuz Sebik, Paulius Uginčius, Kemal S. Türker

Abstract

The electrical activity of muscles can interfere with the electroencephalogram (EEG) signal considering the anatomical locations of facial or masticatory muscles surrounding the skull. In this study, we evaluated the possible interference of the resting activity of the temporalis muscle on the EEG under conventional EEG recording conditions. In 9 healthy adults EEG activity from 19 scalp locations and single motor unit (SMU) activity from anterior temporalis muscle were recorded in three relaxed conditions; eyes open, eyes closed, jaw dropped. The EEG signal was spike triggered averaged (STA) using the action potentials of SMUs as triggers to evaluate their reflections at various EEG recording sites. Resting temporalis SMU activity generated prominent reflections with different amplitudes, reaching maxima in the proximity of the recorded SMU. Interference was also notable at the scalp sites that are relatively far from the recorded SMU and even at the contralateral locations. Considering the great number of SMUs in the head and neck muscles, prominent contamination from the activity of only a single MU should indicate the susceptibility of EEG to muscle activity artifacts even under the rest conditions. This study emphasizes the need for efficient artifact evaluation methods which can handle muscle interferences.

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 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 2%
Unknown 56 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 19%
Researcher 10 18%
Student > Bachelor 6 11%
Student > Postgraduate 4 7%
Professor 4 7%
Other 11 19%
Unknown 11 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 9 16%
Psychology 6 11%
Neuroscience 5 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 9%
Computer Science 4 7%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 19 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 20 July 2018.
All research outputs
#6,405,958
of 22,757,541 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#2,733
of 7,138 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,612
of 226,414 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#129
of 257 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,757,541 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,138 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 226,414 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 257 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.