Sie befinden Sich nicht im Netzwerk der Universität Paderborn. Der Zugriff auf elektronische Ressourcen ist gegebenenfalls nur via VPN oder Shibboleth (DFN-AAI) möglich. mehr Informationen...
IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering, 2020-05, Vol.28 (5), p.1081-1090
2020
Volltextzugriff (PDF)

Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte
Titel
How Sensitive Are EEG Results to Preprocessing Methods: A Benchmarking Study
Ist Teil von
  • IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering, 2020-05, Vol.28 (5), p.1081-1090
Ort / Verlag
IEEE
Erscheinungsjahr
2020
Quelle
IEEE Xplore
Beschreibungen/Notizen
  • Although several guidelines for best practices in EEG preprocessing have been released, even studies that strictly adhere to those guidelines contain considerable variation in the ways that the recommended methods are applied. An open question for researchers is how sensitive the results of EEG analyses are to variations in preprocessing methods and parameters. To address this issue, we analyze the effect of preprocessing methods on downstream EEG analysis using several simple signal and event-related measures. Signal measures include recording-level channel amplitudes, study-level channel amplitude dispersion, and recording spectral characteristics. Event-related methods include ERPs and ERSPs and their correlations across methods for a diverse set of stimulus events. Our analysis also assesses differences in residual signals both in the time and spectral domains after blink artifacts have been removed. Using fully automated pipelines, we evaluate these measures across 17 EEG studies for two ICA-based preprocessing approaches (LARG, MARA) plus two variations of Artifact Subspace Reconstruction (ASR). Although the general structure of the results is similar across these preprocessing methods, there are significant differences, particularly in the low-frequency spectral features and in the residuals left by blinks. These results argue for detailed reporting of processing details as suggested by most guidelines, but also for using a federation of automated processing pipelines and comparison tools to quantify effects of processing choices as part of the research reporting.
Sprache
Englisch
Identifikatoren
ISSN: 1534-4320
eISSN: 1558-0210
DOI: 10.1109/TNSRE.2020.2980223
Titel-ID: cdi_ieee_primary_9047940

Weiterführende Literatur

Empfehlungen zum selben Thema automatisch vorgeschlagen von bX