Literature DB >> 31525310

Capturing the Forest but Missing the Trees: Microstates Inadequate for Characterizing Shorter-Scale EEG Dynamics.

Saurabh Bhaskar Shaw1, Kiret Dhindsa2, James P Reilly3, Suzanna Becker4.   

Abstract

The brain is known to be active even when not performing any overt cognitive tasks, and often it engages in involuntary mind wandering. This resting state has been extensively characterized in terms of fMRI-derived brain networks. However, an alternate method has recently gained popularity: EEG microstate analysis. Proponents of microstates postulate that the brain discontinuously switches between four quasi-stable states defined by specific EEG scalp topologies at peaks in the global field potential (GFP). These microstates are thought to be "atoms of thought," involved with visual, auditory, salience, and attention processing. However, this method makes some major assumptions by excluding EEG data outside the GFP peaks and then clustering the EEG scalp topologies at the GFP peaks, assuming that only one microstate is active at any given time. This study explores the evidence surrounding these assumptions by studying the temporal dynamics of microstates and its clustering space using tools from dynamical systems analysis, fractal, and chaos theory to highlight the shortcomings in microstate analysis. The results show evidence of complex and chaotic EEG dynamics outside the GFP peaks, which is being missed by microstate analysis. Furthermore, the winner-takes-all approach of only one microstate being active at a time is found to be inadequate since the dynamic EEG scalp topology does not always resemble that of the assigned microstate, and there is competition among the different microstate classes. Finally, clustering space analysis shows that the four microstates do not cluster into four distinct and separable clusters. Taken collectively, these results show that the discontinuous description of EEG microstates is inadequate when looking at nonstationary short-scale EEG dynamics.

Year:  2019        PMID: 31525310     DOI: 10.1162/neco_a_01229

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neural Comput        ISSN: 0899-7667            Impact factor:   2.026


  5 in total

1.  Optimal Number of Clusters by Measuring Similarity Among Topographies for Spatio-Temporal ERP Analysis.

Authors:  Reza Mahini; Peng Xu; Guoliang Chen; Yansong Li; Weiyan Ding; Lei Zhang; Nauman Khalid Qureshi; Timo Hämäläinen; Asoke K Nandi; Fengyu Cong
Journal:  Brain Topogr       Date:  2022-07-18       Impact factor: 4.275

2.  Large-scale EEG neural network changes in response to therapeutic TMS.

Authors:  Michael C Gold; Shiwen Yuan; Eric Tirrell; E Frances Kronenberg; Jee Won D Kang; Lauren Hindley; Mohamed Sherif; Joshua C Brown; Linda L Carpenter
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2022-01-17       Impact factor: 8.955

3.  EEG microstate analysis of emotion regulation reveals no sequential processing of valence and emotional arousal.

Authors:  Josephine Zerna; Alexander Strobel; Christoph Scheffel
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-10-28       Impact factor: 4.379

4.  Real-Time Detection and Feedback of Canonical Electroencephalogram Microstates: Validating a Neurofeedback System as a Function of Delay.

Authors:  Tomohisa Asai; Takamasa Hamamoto; Shiho Kashihara; Hiroshi Imamizu
Journal:  Front Syst Neurosci       Date:  2022-02-25

5.  Dynamics of brain function in patients with chronic pain assessed by microstate analysis of resting-state electroencephalography.

Authors:  Elisabeth S May; Cristina Gil Ávila; Son Ta Dinh; Henrik Heitmann; Vanessa D Hohn; Moritz M Nickel; Laura Tiemann; Thomas R Tölle; Markus Ploner
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2021-12-01       Impact factor: 6.961

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.