Paving the way for cross-site pooling of magnetoencephalography (MEG) data

M. P. Weisend; F. M. Hanlon; R. Montaño; S. P. Ahlfors; A. C. Leuthold; D. Pantazis; J. C. Mosher; A. P. Georgopoulos; M. S. Hämäläinen; C. J. Aine

doi:10.1016/j.ics.2006.12.095

Paving the way for cross-site pooling of magnetoencephalography (MEG) data

M. P. Weisend, F. M. Hanlon, R. Montaño, S. P. Ahlfors, A. C. Leuthold, D. Pantazis, J. C. Mosher, A. P. Georgopoulos, M. S. Hämäläinen, C. J. Aine

Neuroscience

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

13 Scopus citations

Abstract

Pooling of magnetoencephalography (MEG) data across laboratories is non-trivial because of differences in hardware, software, and environmental noise levels. To investigate these issues, we conducted a study with the same five subjects at three sites with different MEG arrays: Elekta-Neuromag Vectorview (Boston), VSM MedTech Omega 275 (Albuquerque), and 4D Neuroimaging Magnes 3600 WH (Minneapolis). Subjects were run in a simple somatosensory paradigm. Phantom data were also taken at each site. We developed software to allow comparisons of test/retest reliability across subjects, machines, and analysis methods. Preliminary analyses showed excellent test/retest results within subjects across instruments. Analysis of phantom data showed a localization error of less than 2 mm across multiple software packages. Our results show that (1) instruments from different manufacturers yield similar results for somatosensory data, and that (2) multiple software packages produce very accurate results for simple source configurations.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	615-618
Number of pages	4
Journal	International Congress Series
Volume	1300
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ics.2006.12.095
State	Published - Jun 2007

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
This work was supported by U.S. DOE Award Number DE-FG02-99ER62764 to The MIND Institute, NIBIB grant R01-EB002010, by The Center for Functional Neuromaging Technologies (NIH grant P41-RR14075), and by Los Alamos National Security, LLC, for the NNSA of the U.S. DOE under contract DE-AC52-06NA25396.

Keywords

Data pooling
Magnetoencephalography
Median nerve
Methodology
Site comparison

Publisher link

10.1016/j.ics.2006.12.095

Find It

Find It at U of M Libraries

Cite this

@article{95b81cf9770b46958b940f6423aff5d3,

title = "Paving the way for cross-site pooling of magnetoencephalography (MEG) data",

abstract = "Pooling of magnetoencephalography (MEG) data across laboratories is non-trivial because of differences in hardware, software, and environmental noise levels. To investigate these issues, we conducted a study with the same five subjects at three sites with different MEG arrays: Elekta-Neuromag Vectorview (Boston), VSM MedTech Omega 275 (Albuquerque), and 4D Neuroimaging Magnes 3600 WH (Minneapolis). Subjects were run in a simple somatosensory paradigm. Phantom data were also taken at each site. We developed software to allow comparisons of test/retest reliability across subjects, machines, and analysis methods. Preliminary analyses showed excellent test/retest results within subjects across instruments. Analysis of phantom data showed a localization error of less than 2 mm across multiple software packages. Our results show that (1) instruments from different manufacturers yield similar results for somatosensory data, and that (2) multiple software packages produce very accurate results for simple source configurations.",

keywords = "Data pooling, Magnetoencephalography, Median nerve, Methodology, Site comparison",

author = "Weisend, {M. P.} and Hanlon, {F. M.} and R. Monta{\~n}o and Ahlfors, {S. P.} and Leuthold, {A. C.} and D. Pantazis and Mosher, {J. C.} and Georgopoulos, {A. P.} and H{\"a}m{\"a}l{\"a}inen, {M. S.} and Aine, {C. J.}",

note = "Funding Information: This work was supported by U.S. DOE Award Number DE-FG02-99ER62764 to The MIND Institute, NIBIB grant R01-EB002010, by The Center for Functional Neuromaging Technologies (NIH grant P41-RR14075), and by Los Alamos National Security, LLC, for the NNSA of the U.S. DOE under contract DE-AC52-06NA25396.",

year = "2007",

month = jun,

doi = "10.1016/j.ics.2006.12.095",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "1300",

pages = "615--618",

journal = "International Congress Series",

issn = "0531-5131",

publisher = "Elsevier B.V.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Paving the way for cross-site pooling of magnetoencephalography (MEG) data

AU - Weisend, M. P.

AU - Hanlon, F. M.

AU - Montaño, R.

AU - Ahlfors, S. P.

AU - Leuthold, A. C.

AU - Pantazis, D.

AU - Mosher, J. C.

AU - Georgopoulos, A. P.

AU - Hämäläinen, M. S.

AU - Aine, C. J.

N1 - Funding Information: This work was supported by U.S. DOE Award Number DE-FG02-99ER62764 to The MIND Institute, NIBIB grant R01-EB002010, by The Center for Functional Neuromaging Technologies (NIH grant P41-RR14075), and by Los Alamos National Security, LLC, for the NNSA of the U.S. DOE under contract DE-AC52-06NA25396.

PY - 2007/6

Y1 - 2007/6

N2 - Pooling of magnetoencephalography (MEG) data across laboratories is non-trivial because of differences in hardware, software, and environmental noise levels. To investigate these issues, we conducted a study with the same five subjects at three sites with different MEG arrays: Elekta-Neuromag Vectorview (Boston), VSM MedTech Omega 275 (Albuquerque), and 4D Neuroimaging Magnes 3600 WH (Minneapolis). Subjects were run in a simple somatosensory paradigm. Phantom data were also taken at each site. We developed software to allow comparisons of test/retest reliability across subjects, machines, and analysis methods. Preliminary analyses showed excellent test/retest results within subjects across instruments. Analysis of phantom data showed a localization error of less than 2 mm across multiple software packages. Our results show that (1) instruments from different manufacturers yield similar results for somatosensory data, and that (2) multiple software packages produce very accurate results for simple source configurations.

AB - Pooling of magnetoencephalography (MEG) data across laboratories is non-trivial because of differences in hardware, software, and environmental noise levels. To investigate these issues, we conducted a study with the same five subjects at three sites with different MEG arrays: Elekta-Neuromag Vectorview (Boston), VSM MedTech Omega 275 (Albuquerque), and 4D Neuroimaging Magnes 3600 WH (Minneapolis). Subjects were run in a simple somatosensory paradigm. Phantom data were also taken at each site. We developed software to allow comparisons of test/retest reliability across subjects, machines, and analysis methods. Preliminary analyses showed excellent test/retest results within subjects across instruments. Analysis of phantom data showed a localization error of less than 2 mm across multiple software packages. Our results show that (1) instruments from different manufacturers yield similar results for somatosensory data, and that (2) multiple software packages produce very accurate results for simple source configurations.

KW - Data pooling

KW - Magnetoencephalography

KW - Median nerve

KW - Methodology

KW - Site comparison

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34249993621&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34249993621&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ics.2006.12.095

DO - 10.1016/j.ics.2006.12.095

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:34249993621

SN - 0531-5131

VL - 1300

SP - 615

EP - 618

JO - International Congress Series

JF - International Congress Series

ER -

Paving the way for cross-site pooling of magnetoencephalography (MEG) data

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

Publisher link

Find It

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this