制定 TMS-EEG 数据预处理标准。

IF 4.7 2区 医学 Q1 NEUROIMAGING NeuroImage Pub Date : 2024-09-26 DOI:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2024.120874
A. Brancaccio , D. Tabarelli , A. Zazio , G. Bertazzoli , J. Metsomaa , U. Ziemann , M. Bortoletto , P. Belardinelli
{"title":"制定 TMS-EEG 数据预处理标准。","authors":"A. Brancaccio ,&nbsp;D. Tabarelli ,&nbsp;A. Zazio ,&nbsp;G. Bertazzoli ,&nbsp;J. Metsomaa ,&nbsp;U. Ziemann ,&nbsp;M. Bortoletto ,&nbsp;P. Belardinelli","doi":"10.1016/j.neuroimage.2024.120874","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Combining Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation (NIBS) techniques with the recording of brain electrophysiological activity is an increasingly widespread approach in neuroscience. Particularly successful has been the simultaneous combination of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) and Electroencephalography (EEG). Unfortunately, the strong magnetic pulse required to effectively interact with brain activity inevitably induces artifacts in the concurrent EEG acquisition. Therefore, a careful but aggressive pre-processing is required to efficiently remove artifacts. Unfortunately, as already reported in the literature, different preprocessing approaches can introduce variability in the results. Here we aim at characterizing the three main TMS-EEG preprocessing pipelines currently available, namely ARTIST (Wu et al., 2018), TESA (Rogasch et al., 2017) and SOUND/SSP-SIR (Mutanen et al., 2018, 2016), providing an insight to researchers who need to choose between different approaches. Differently from previous works, we tested the pipelines using a synthetic TMS-EEG signal with a known <em>ground-truth</em> (the artifacts-free to-be-reconstructed signal). In this way, it was possible to assess the reliability of each pipeline precisely and quantitatively, providing a more robust reference for future research. In summary, we found that all pipelines performed well, but with differences in terms of the spatio-temporal precision of the ground-truth reconstruction. Crucially, the three pipelines impacted differently on the inter-trial variability, with ARTIST introducing inter-trial variability not already intrinsic to the ground-truth signal.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":19299,"journal":{"name":"NeuroImage","volume":"301 ","pages":"Article 120874"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Towards the definition of a standard in TMS-EEG data preprocessing\",\"authors\":\"A. Brancaccio ,&nbsp;D. Tabarelli ,&nbsp;A. Zazio ,&nbsp;G. Bertazzoli ,&nbsp;J. Metsomaa ,&nbsp;U. Ziemann ,&nbsp;M. Bortoletto ,&nbsp;P. Belardinelli\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.neuroimage.2024.120874\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Combining Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation (NIBS) techniques with the recording of brain electrophysiological activity is an increasingly widespread approach in neuroscience. Particularly successful has been the simultaneous combination of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) and Electroencephalography (EEG). Unfortunately, the strong magnetic pulse required to effectively interact with brain activity inevitably induces artifacts in the concurrent EEG acquisition. Therefore, a careful but aggressive pre-processing is required to efficiently remove artifacts. Unfortunately, as already reported in the literature, different preprocessing approaches can introduce variability in the results. Here we aim at characterizing the three main TMS-EEG preprocessing pipelines currently available, namely ARTIST (Wu et al., 2018), TESA (Rogasch et al., 2017) and SOUND/SSP-SIR (Mutanen et al., 2018, 2016), providing an insight to researchers who need to choose between different approaches. Differently from previous works, we tested the pipelines using a synthetic TMS-EEG signal with a known <em>ground-truth</em> (the artifacts-free to-be-reconstructed signal). In this way, it was possible to assess the reliability of each pipeline precisely and quantitatively, providing a more robust reference for future research. In summary, we found that all pipelines performed well, but with differences in terms of the spatio-temporal precision of the ground-truth reconstruction. Crucially, the three pipelines impacted differently on the inter-trial variability, with ARTIST introducing inter-trial variability not already intrinsic to the ground-truth signal.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19299,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"NeuroImage\",\"volume\":\"301 \",\"pages\":\"Article 120874\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"NeuroImage\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811924003719\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROIMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NeuroImage","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811924003719","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NEUROIMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

将非侵入性脑部刺激(NIBS)技术与脑电生理活动记录相结合,是神经科学领域日益广泛采用的方法。同时结合经颅磁刺激(TMS)和脑电图(EEG)尤其成功。遗憾的是,与大脑活动有效互动所需的强磁脉冲不可避免地会在同时进行的脑电图采集中产生伪影。因此,需要进行仔细而积极的预处理,以有效去除伪影。遗憾的是,正如已有文献报道的那样,不同的预处理方法会导致结果的差异。在此,我们旨在描述目前可用的三种主要 TMS-EEG 预处理管道,即 ARTIST(Wu 等人,2018 年)、TESA(Rogasch 等人,2017 年)和 SOUND/SSP-SIR(Mutanen 等人,2018 年,2016 年),为需要在不同方法之间做出选择的研究人员提供见解。与之前的研究不同,我们使用合成的 TMS-EEG 信号和已知的地面实况(无伪像的待重建信号)对管道进行了测试。通过这种方法,我们可以精确、定量地评估每种管道的可靠性,为今后的研究提供更可靠的参考。总之,我们发现所有管道都表现良好,但在地面实况重建的时空精度方面存在差异。最重要的是,三种管道对试验间变异性的影响不同,ARTIST 引入了地面实况信号本不存在的试验间变异性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Towards the definition of a standard in TMS-EEG data preprocessing
Combining Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation (NIBS) techniques with the recording of brain electrophysiological activity is an increasingly widespread approach in neuroscience. Particularly successful has been the simultaneous combination of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) and Electroencephalography (EEG). Unfortunately, the strong magnetic pulse required to effectively interact with brain activity inevitably induces artifacts in the concurrent EEG acquisition. Therefore, a careful but aggressive pre-processing is required to efficiently remove artifacts. Unfortunately, as already reported in the literature, different preprocessing approaches can introduce variability in the results. Here we aim at characterizing the three main TMS-EEG preprocessing pipelines currently available, namely ARTIST (Wu et al., 2018), TESA (Rogasch et al., 2017) and SOUND/SSP-SIR (Mutanen et al., 2018, 2016), providing an insight to researchers who need to choose between different approaches. Differently from previous works, we tested the pipelines using a synthetic TMS-EEG signal with a known ground-truth (the artifacts-free to-be-reconstructed signal). In this way, it was possible to assess the reliability of each pipeline precisely and quantitatively, providing a more robust reference for future research. In summary, we found that all pipelines performed well, but with differences in terms of the spatio-temporal precision of the ground-truth reconstruction. Crucially, the three pipelines impacted differently on the inter-trial variability, with ARTIST introducing inter-trial variability not already intrinsic to the ground-truth signal.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
NeuroImage
NeuroImage 医学-核医学
CiteScore
11.30
自引率
10.50%
发文量
809
审稿时长
63 days
期刊介绍: NeuroImage, a Journal of Brain Function provides a vehicle for communicating important advances in acquiring, analyzing, and modelling neuroimaging data and in applying these techniques to the study of structure-function and brain-behavior relationships. Though the emphasis is on the macroscopic level of human brain organization, meso-and microscopic neuroimaging across all species will be considered if informative for understanding the aforementioned relationships.
期刊最新文献
Differentiating atypical parkinsonian syndromes with hyperbolic few-shot contrastive learning Exploring the relationship between hallucination proneness and brain morphology Biological mechanism of sex differences in mental rotation: Evidence from multimodal MRI, transcriptomic and receptor/transporter data. Different oscillatory mechanisms of dementia-related diseases with cognitive impairment in closed-eye state. Generative Modeling of the Circle of Willis Using 3D-StyleGAN.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1