↓ Skip to main content

Removing ballistocardiogram (BCG) artifact from full-scalp EEG acquired inside the MR scanner with Orthogonal Matching Pursuit (OMP)

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, July 2014
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
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 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
Removing ballistocardiogram (BCG) artifact from full-scalp EEG acquired inside the MR scanner with Orthogonal Matching Pursuit (OMP)
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, July 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2014.00218
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hongjing Xia, Dan Ruan, Mark S. Cohen

Abstract

Ballistocardiogram (BCG) artifact remains a major challenge that renders electroencephalographic (EEG) signals hard to interpret in simultaneous EEG and functional MRI (fMRI) data acquisition. Here, we propose an integrated learning and inference approach that takes advantage of a commercial high-density EEG cap, to estimate the BCG contribution in noisy EEG recordings from inside the MR scanner. To estimate reliably the full-scalp BCG artifacts, a near-optimal subset (20 out of 256) of channels first was identified using a modified recording setup. In subsequent recordings inside the MR scanner, BCG-only signal from this subset of channels was used to generate continuous estimates of the full-scalp BCG artifacts via inference, from which the intended EEG signal was recovered. The reconstruction of the EEG was performed with both a direct subtraction and an optimization scheme. We evaluated the performance on both synthetic and real contaminated recordings, and compared it to the benchmark Optimal Basis Set (OBS) method. In the challenging non-event-related-potential (non-ERP) EEG studies, our reconstruction can yield more than fourteen-fold improvement in reducing the normalized RMS error of EEG signals, compared to OBS.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 48 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 33%
Researcher 9 18%
Student > Master 8 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 7 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 7 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 12%
Neuroscience 6 12%
Psychology 6 12%
Computer Science 4 8%
Other 9 18%
Unknown 11 22%
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 31 July 2014.
All research outputs
#16,720,137
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#7,423
of 11,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#136,277
of 239,834 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#77
of 125 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,537 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 239,834 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 125 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.