Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/10860
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorFlanagan, Dannyen
dc.contributor.authorAbbott, David Fen
dc.contributor.authorJackson, Graeme Den
dc.date.accessioned2015-05-16T00:26:18Z
dc.date.available2015-05-16T00:26:18Z
dc.date.issued2009-07-25en
dc.identifier.citationClinical Neurophysiology : Official Journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology 2009; 120(9): 1637-47en
dc.identifier.govdoc19632890en
dc.identifier.otherPUBMEDen
dc.identifier.urihttps://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/10860en
dc.description.abstractThe aim of this investigation was to determine the effect of inaccurate or inconsistent marking up of events in the EEG on statistical analysis of EEG/fMRI studies of patients with epilepsy.EEGs obtained during EEG/fMRI studies conducted on 10 patients with epilepsy and six normal control subjects were reviewed. All clear epileptiform events were marked up in the patient EEGs, as were all small movement-related artefacts in the patient and control subject EEGs. We then considered the effect on the numbers of voxels above threshold in the resulting Statistical Parametric Mapping (SPM) analysis if events were omitted, mislabelled, or if event times were inconsistently marked up.Omitting true epileptiform events resulted in a decrease in the number of voxels that survive statistical threshold. Mixing epileptiform and non-epileptiform events in the SPM analysis generally (but not always) decreased the number of voxels that survived threshold. Inconsistent event mark-up had little effect if the inconsistency was small (<200 ms), but had more effect if it was large (>500 ms).It is important to accurately mark-up EEGs acquired during EEG/fMRI studies in order to get the best results from subsequent analyses.Our study reveals the consequences of inaccurate review of the EEG in EEG/fMRI studies and suggests guidelines for the review of EEG in these investigations which, if followed, should result in studies of acceptable quality.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.subject.otherArtifactsen
dc.subject.otherBrain Mappingen
dc.subject.otherData Interpretation, Statisticalen
dc.subject.otherElectroencephalography.statistics & numerical dataen
dc.subject.otherEpilepsy.physiopathologyen
dc.subject.otherHumansen
dc.subject.otherInfant, Newbornen
dc.subject.otherMagnetic Resonance Imaging.statistics & numerical dataen
dc.subject.otherMovement.physiologyen
dc.subject.otherOxygen.blooden
dc.subject.otherReproducibility of Resultsen
dc.titleHow wrong can we be? The effect of inaccurate mark-up of EEG/fMRI studies in epilepsy.en
dc.typeJournal Articleen
dc.identifier.journaltitleClinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiologyen
dc.identifier.affiliationBrain Research Institute, Florey Neuroscience Institutes (Austin), Melbourne, Victoria, Australiaen
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.clinph.2009.04.025en
dc.description.pages1637-47en
dc.relation.urlhttps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19632890en
dc.type.austinJournal Articleen
local.name.researcherAbbott, David F
item.languageiso639-1en-
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.openairetypeJournal Article-
crisitem.author.deptThe Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health-
crisitem.author.deptNeurology-
crisitem.author.deptThe Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health-
Appears in Collections:Journal articles
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

46
checked on Dec 22, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in AHRO are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.