Literature DB >> 15210288

Automatic correction of ocular artifacts in the EEG: a comparison of regression-based and component-based methods.

Garrick L Wallstrom1, Robert E Kass, Anita Miller, Jeffrey F Cohn, Nathan A Fox.   

Abstract

A variety of procedures have been proposed to correct ocular artifacts in the electroencephalogram (EEG), including methods based on regression, principal components analysis (PCA) and independent component analysis (ICA). The current study compared these three methods, and it evaluated a modified regression approach using Bayesian adaptive regression splines to filter the electrooculogram (EOG) before computing correction factors. We applied each artifact correction procedure to real and simulated EEG data of varying epoch lengths and then quantified the impact of correction on spectral parameters of the EEG. We found that the adaptive filter improved regression-based artifact correction. An automated PCA method effectively reduced ocular artifacts and resulted in minimal spectral distortion, whereas ICA correction appeared to distort power between 5 and 20 Hz. In general, reducing the epoch length improved the accuracy of estimating spectral power in the alpha (7.5-12.5 Hz) and beta (12.5-19.5 Hz) bands, but it worsened the accuracy for power in the theta (3.5-7.5 Hz) band and distorted time domain features. Results supported the use of regression-based and PCA-based ocular artifact correction and suggested a need for further studies examining possible spectral distortion from ICA-based correction procedures.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15210288     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2004.03.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Psychophysiol        ISSN: 0167-8760            Impact factor:   2.997


  43 in total

Review 1.  Brain computer interfaces, a review.

Authors:  Luis Fernando Nicolas-Alonso; Jaime Gomez-Gil
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2012-01-31       Impact factor: 3.576

2.  Misinformation in the conjugate prior for the linear model with implications for free-knot spline modelling.

Authors:  Christopher J Paciorek
Journal:  Bayesian Anal       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 3.728

3.  An Implementation of Bayesian Adaptive Regression Splines (BARS) in C with S and R Wrappers.

Authors:  Garrick Wallstrom; Jeffrey Liebner; Robert E Kass
Journal:  J Stat Softw       Date:  2008-06-01       Impact factor: 6.440

4.  Empirical validation of directed functional connectivity.

Authors:  Ravi D Mill; Anto Bagic; Andreea Bostan; Walter Schneider; Michael W Cole
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2016-11-14       Impact factor: 6.556

5.  Brain-to-brain coupling during handholding is associated with pain reduction.

Authors:  Pavel Goldstein; Irit Weissman-Fogel; Guillaume Dumas; Simone G Shamay-Tsoory
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-02-26       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Removal of muscular artifacts in EEG signals: a comparison of linear decomposition methods.

Authors:  Laura Frølich; Irene Dowding
Journal:  Brain Inform       Date:  2018-01-10

7.  Electromyogenic Artifacts and Electroencephalographic Inferences Revisited.

Authors:  Brenton W McMenamin; Alexander J Shackman; Lawrence L Greischar; Richard J Davidson
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2010-08-02       Impact factor: 6.556

8.  Prefrontal dynamics underlying rapid instructed task learning reverse with practice.

Authors:  Michael W Cole; Anto Bagic; Robert Kass; Walter Schneider
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2010-10-20       Impact factor: 6.167

9.  The phi complex as a neuromarker of human social coordination.

Authors:  Emmanuelle Tognoli; Julien Lagarde; Gonzalo C DeGuzman; J A Scott Kelso
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2007-04-30       Impact factor: 11.205

10.  Validation of ICA-based myogenic artifact correction for scalp and source-localized EEG.

Authors:  Brenton W McMenamin; Alexander J Shackman; Jeffrey S Maxwell; David R W Bachhuber; Adam M Koppenhaver; Lawrence L Greischar; Richard J Davidson
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2009-10-13       Impact factor: 6.556

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.