↓ Skip to main content

Signal Quality Evaluation of Emerging EEG Devices

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
10 X users

Readers on

mendeley
228 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
Signal Quality Evaluation of Emerging EEG Devices
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, February 2018
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2018.00098
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thea Radüntz

Abstract

Electroencephalogram (EEG) registration as a direct measure of brain activity has unique potentials. It is one of the most reliable and predicative indicators when studying human cognition, evaluating a subject's health condition, or monitoring their mental state. Unfortunately, standard signal acquisition procedures limit the usability of EEG devices and narrow their application outside the lab. Emerging sensor technology allows gel-free EEG registration and wireless signal transmission. Thus, it enables quick and easy application of EEG devices by users themselves. Although a main requirement for the interpretation of an EEG is good signal quality, there is a lack of research on this topic in relation to new devices. In our work, we compared the signal quality of six very different EEG devices. On six consecutive days, 24 subjects wore each device for 60 min and completed tasks and games on the computer. The registered signals were evaluated in the time and frequency domains. In the time domain, we examined the percentage of artifact-contaminated EEG segments and the signal-to-noise ratios. In the frequency domain, we focused on the band power variation in relation to task demands. The results indicated that the signal quality of a mobile, gel-based EEG system could not be surpassed by that of a gel-free system. However, some of the mobile dry-electrode devices offered signals that were almost comparable and were very promising. This study provided a differentiated view of the signal quality of emerging mobile and gel-free EEG recording technology and allowed an assessment of the functionality of the new devices. Hence, it provided a crucial prerequisite for their general application, while simultaneously supporting their further development.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 228 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 228 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 54 24%
Researcher 35 15%
Student > Master 28 12%
Student > Bachelor 15 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 4%
Other 30 13%
Unknown 56 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 53 23%
Neuroscience 31 14%
Computer Science 15 7%
Psychology 15 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 5%
Other 36 16%
Unknown 66 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 01 October 2020.
All research outputs
#2,357,320
of 24,099,692 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#1,280
of 14,762 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,095
of 453,308 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#43
of 334 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,099,692 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,762 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 453,308 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 334 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.