74
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    1
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A Reproducible MEG/EEG Group Study With the MNE Software: Recommendations, Quality Assessments, and Good Practices

      methods-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Cognitive neuroscience questions are commonly tested with experiments that involve a cohort of subjects. The cohort can consist of a handful of subjects for small studies to hundreds or thousands of subjects in open datasets. While there exist various online resources to get started with the analysis of magnetoencephalography (MEG) or electroencephalography (EEG) data, such educational materials are usually restricted to the analysis of a single subject. This is in part because data from larger group studies are harder to share, but also analyses of such data often require subject-specific decisions which are hard to document. This work presents the results obtained by the reanalysis of an open dataset from Wakeman and Henson ( 2015) using the MNE software package. The analysis covers preprocessing steps, quality assurance steps, sensor space analysis of evoked responses, source localization, and statistics in both sensor and source space. Results with possible alternative strategies are presented and discussed at different stages such as the use of high-pass filtering versus baseline correction, tSSS vs. SSS, the use of a minimum norm inverse vs. LCMV beamformer, and the use of univariate or multivariate statistics. This aims to provide a comparative study of different stages of M/EEG analysis pipeline on the same dataset, with open access to all of the scripts necessary to reproduce this analysis.

          Related collections

          Most cited references48

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Spatiotemporal signal space separation method for rejecting nearby interference in MEG measurements.

          Limitations of traditional magnetoencephalography (MEG) exclude some important patient groups from MEG examinations, such as epilepsy patients with a vagus nerve stimulator, patients with magnetic particles on the head or having magnetic dental materials that cause severe movement-related artefact signals. Conventional interference rejection methods are not able to remove the artefacts originating this close to the MEG sensor array. For example, the reference array method is unable to suppress interference generated by sources closer to the sensors than the reference array, about 20-40 cm. The spatiotemporal signal space separation method proposed in this paper recognizes and removes both external interference and the artefacts produced by these nearby sources, even on the scalp. First, the basic separation into brain-related and external interference signals is accomplished with signal space separation based on sensor geometry and Maxwell's equations only. After this, the artefacts from nearby sources are extracted by a simple statistical analysis in the time domain, and projected out. Practical examples with artificial current dipoles and interference sources as well as data from real patients demonstrate that the method removes the artefacts without altering the field patterns of the brain signals.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Dynamic imaging of coherent sources: Studying neural interactions in the human brain.

            Functional connectivity between cortical areas may appear as correlated time behavior of neural activity. It has been suggested that merging of separate features into a single percept ("binding") is associated with coherent gamma band activity across the cortical areas involved. Therefore, it would be of utmost interest to image cortico-cortical coherence in the working human brain. The frequency specificity and transient nature of these interactions requires time-sensitive tools such as magneto- or electroencephalography (MEG/EEG). Coherence between signals of sensors covering different scalp areas is commonly taken as a measure of functional coupling. However, this approach provides vague information on the actual cortical areas involved, owing to the complex relation between the active brain areas and the sensor recordings. We propose a solution to the crucial issue of proceeding beyond the MEG sensor level to estimate coherences between cortical areas. Dynamic imaging of coherent sources (DICS) uses a spatial filter to localize coherent brain regions and provides the time courses of their activity. Reference points for the computation of neural coupling may be based on brain areas of maximum power or other physiologically meaningful information, or they may be estimated starting from sensor coherences. The performance of DICS is evaluated with simulated data and illustrated with recordings of spontaneous activity in a healthy subject and a parkinsonian patient. Methods for estimating functional connectivities between brain areas will facilitate characterization of cortical networks involved in sensory, motor, or cognitive tasks and will allow investigation of pathological connectivities in neurological disorders.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              On the interpretation of weight vectors of linear models in multivariate neuroimaging.

              The increase in spatiotemporal resolution of neuroimaging devices is accompanied by a trend towards more powerful multivariate analysis methods. Often it is desired to interpret the outcome of these methods with respect to the cognitive processes under study. Here we discuss which methods allow for such interpretations, and provide guidelines for choosing an appropriate analysis for a given experimental goal: For a surgeon who needs to decide where to remove brain tissue it is most important to determine the origin of cognitive functions and associated neural processes. In contrast, when communicating with paralyzed or comatose patients via brain-computer interfaces, it is most important to accurately extract the neural processes specific to a certain mental state. These equally important but complementary objectives require different analysis methods. Determining the origin of neural processes in time or space from the parameters of a data-driven model requires what we call a forward model of the data; such a model explains how the measured data was generated from the neural sources. Examples are general linear models (GLMs). Methods for the extraction of neural information from data can be considered as backward models, as they attempt to reverse the data generating process. Examples are multivariate classifiers. Here we demonstrate that the parameters of forward models are neurophysiologically interpretable in the sense that significant nonzero weights are only observed at channels the activity of which is related to the brain process under study. In contrast, the interpretation of backward model parameters can lead to wrong conclusions regarding the spatial or temporal origin of the neural signals of interest, since significant nonzero weights may also be observed at channels the activity of which is statistically independent of the brain process under study. As a remedy for the linear case, we propose a procedure for transforming backward models into forward models. This procedure enables the neurophysiological interpretation of the parameters of linear backward models. We hope that this work raises awareness for an often encountered problem and provides a theoretical basis for conducting better interpretable multivariate neuroimaging analyses. Copyright © 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Neurosci
                Front Neurosci
                Front. Neurosci.
                Frontiers in Neuroscience
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1662-4548
                1662-453X
                06 August 2018
                2018
                : 12
                : 530
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Telecom ParisTech, Université Paris-Saclay , Paris, France
                [2] 2Institute for Learning and Brain Sciences, University of Washington , Seattle, WA, United States
                [3] 3NeuroSpin, CEA, Université Paris-Saclay , Gif-sur-Yvette, France
                [4] 4INRIA, Université Paris-Saclay , Saclay, France
                [5] 5Department of Physics, University of Washington , Seattle, WA, United States
                [6] 6Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School , Charlestown, MA, United States
                Author notes

                Edited by: Pedro Antonio Valdes-Sosa, Clinical Hospital of Chengdu Brain Science Institute, China

                Reviewed by: Stefan Haufe, Technische Universität Berlin, Germany; Gareth Barnes, University College London, United Kingdom

                *Correspondence: Alexandre Gramfort alexandre.gramfort@ 123456inria.fr

                This article was submitted to Brain Imaging Methods, a section of the journal Frontiers in Neuroscience

                Article
                10.3389/fnins.2018.00530
                6088222
                30127712
                a9514118-abf9-43fd-bbce-907eae76f4c8
                Copyright © 2018 Jas, Larson, Engemann, Leppäkangas, Taulu, Hämäläinen and Gramfort.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 26 December 2017
                : 16 July 2018
                Page count
                Figures: 12, Tables: 0, Equations: 0, References: 81, Pages: 18, Words: 14013
                Funding
                Funded by: National Institutes of Health 10.13039/100000002
                Award ID: R01 MH106174
                Award ID: P41RR014075
                Funded by: National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders 10.13039/100000055
                Award ID: F32DC012456
                Funded by: National Science Foundation 10.13039/100000001
                Award ID: 0958669
                Award ID: 1042134
                Funded by: European Research Council 10.13039/501100000781
                Award ID: ERC-YStG-676943
                Funded by: Agence Nationale de la Recherche 10.13039/501100001665
                Award ID: ANR-14-NEUC-0002-01
                Funded by: National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering 10.13039/100000070
                Award ID: 5R01EB009048
                Categories
                Neuroscience
                Methods

                Neurosciences
                electroencephalography (eeg),magnetoencephalography (meg),neuroimaging,software,python,open-source

                Comments

                Comment on this article