Good practice for conducting and reporting MEG research

 |  Login

Show simple item record

dc.contributor Aalto-yliopisto fi
dc.contributor Aalto University en Gross, Joachim Baillet, Sylvain Barnes, Gareth R. Henson, Richard N. Hillebrand, Arjan Jensen, Ole Jerbi, Karim Litvak, Vladimir Maess, Burkhard Oostenveld, Robert Parkkonen, Lauri Taylor, Jason R. Wassenhovek, Virginie van Wibraln, Michael Schoffelen, Jan-Mathjis 2017-05-11T08:40:06Z 2017-05-11T08:40:06Z 2013
dc.identifier.citation Grossa , J , Baillet , S , Barnes , G R , Henson , R N , Hillebrand , A , Jensen , O , Jerbi , K , Litvak , V , Maess , B , Oostenveld , R , Parkkonen , L , Taylor , J R , Wassenhovek , V V , Wibraln , M & Schoffelen , J-M 2013 , ' Good practice for conducting and reporting MEG research ' NEUROIMAGE , vol 65 , pp. 349-363 . DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.10.001 en
dc.identifier.issn 1053-8119
dc.identifier.issn 1095-9572
dc.identifier.other PURE UUID: 9599621a-5a43-4af7-9bdf-b50e7d9bb843
dc.identifier.other PURE ITEMURL:
dc.identifier.other PURE FILEURL:
dc.description.abstract Magnetoencephalographic (MEG) recordings are a rich source of information about the neural dynamics underlying cognitive processes in the brain, with excellent temporal and good spatial resolution. In recent years there have been considerable advances in MEG hardware developments and methods. Sophisticated analysis techniques are now routinely applied and continuously improved, leading to fascinating insights into the intricate dynamics of neural processes. However, the rapidly increasing level of complexity of the different steps in a MEG study make it difficult for novices, and sometimes even for experts, to stay aware of possible limitations and caveats. Furthermore, the complexity of MEG data acquisition and data analysis requires special attention when describing MEG studies in publications, in order to facilitate interpretation and reproduction of the results. This manuscript aims at making recommendations for a number of important data acquisition and data analysis steps and suggests details that should be specified in manuscripts reporting MEG studies. These recommendations will hopefully serve as guidelines that help to strengthen the position of the MEG research community within the field of neuroscience, and may foster discussion in order to further enhance the quality and impact of MEG research. en
dc.format.extent 349-363
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf
dc.language.iso en en
dc.relation.ispartofseries NEUROIMAGE en
dc.relation.ispartofseries Volume 65 en
dc.rights openAccess en
dc.subject.other 114 Physical sciences en
dc.subject.other 221 Nanotechnology en
dc.subject.other 214 Mechanical engineering en
dc.subject.other 218 Environmental engineering en
dc.title Good practice for conducting and reporting MEG research en
dc.type A1 Alkuperäisartikkeli tieteellisessä aikakauslehdessä fi
dc.description.version Peer reviewed en
dc.subject.keyword Magnetoencephalography
dc.subject.keyword MEG
dc.subject.keyword Acquisition
dc.subject.keyword Analysis
dc.subject.keyword Connectivity
dc.subject.keyword Source localization
dc.subject.keyword Guidelines
dc.subject.keyword Recommendations
dc.subject.keyword Reproducible research
dc.subject.keyword Spectral analysis
dc.subject.keyword 114 Physical sciences
dc.subject.keyword 221 Nanotechnology
dc.subject.keyword 214 Mechanical engineering
dc.subject.keyword 218 Environmental engineering
dc.identifier.urn URN:NBN:fi:aalto-201705114088
dc.identifier.doi 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.10.001
dc.type.version publishedVersion

Files in this item

Files Size Format View

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search archive

Advanced Search

article-iconSubmit a publication


My Account