Comparison between <scp>EEG</scp> and <scp>MEG</scp> of static and dynamic resting‐state networks

The characterisation of resting-state networks (RSNs) using neuroimaging techniques has significantly contributed to our understanding of the organisation of brain activity. Prior work has demonstrated the electrophysiological basis of RSNs and their dynamic nature, revealing transient activations of brain networks with millisecond timescales. While previous research has confirmed the comparability of RSNs identified by electroencephalography (EEG) to those identified by magnetoencephalography (MEG) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), most studies have utilised static analysis techniques, ignoring the dynamic nature of brain activity. Often, these studies use high-density EEG systems, which limit their applicability in clinical settings. Addressing these gaps, our research studies RSNs using medium-density EEG systems (61 sensors), comparing both static and dynamic brain network features to those obtained from a high-density MEG system (306 sensors). We assess the qualitative and quantitative comparability of EEG-derived RSNs to those from MEG, including their ability to capture age-related effects, and explore the reproducibility of dynamic RSNs within and across the modalities. Our findings suggest that both MEG and EEG offer comparable static and dynamic network descriptions, albeit with MEG offering some increased sensitivity and reproducibility. Such RSNs and their comparability across the two modalities remained consistent qualitatively but not quantitatively when the data were reconstructed without subject-specific structural MRI images.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Human Brain Mapping
Published
2024-09-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.70018
Citations
13
Primary Topic
Neural dynamics and brain function
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.46

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison between EEG and MEG of static and dynamic resting‐state networks

Chetan Gohil, Mats W.J. van Es, SungJun Cho, Mark W. Woolrich
13 citations
Human Brain Mapping
Neural dynamics and brain function
4.46
article

Comparison between EEG and MEG of static and dynamic resting‐state networks

Chetan Gohil, Mats W.J. van Es, SungJun Cho, Mark W. Woolrich
article en
13 citations

Abstract

The characterisation of resting-state networks (RSNs) using neuroimaging techniques has significantly contributed to our understanding of the organisation of brain activity. Prior work has demonstrated the electrophysiological basis of RSNs and their dynamic nature, revealing transient activations of brain networks with millisecond timescales. While previous research has confirmed the comparability of RSNs identified by electroencephalography (EEG) to those identified by magnetoencephalography (MEG) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), most studies have utilised static analysis techniques, ignoring the dynamic nature of brain activity. Often, these studies use high-density EEG systems, which limit their applicability in clinical settings. Addressing these gaps, our research studies RSNs using medium-density EEG systems (61 sensors), comparing both static and dynamic brain network features to those obtained from a high-density MEG system (306 sensors). We assess the qualitative and quantitative comparability of EEG-derived RSNs to those from MEG, including their ability to capture age-related effects, and explore the reproducibility of dynamic RSNs within and across the modalities. Our findings suggest that both MEG and EEG offer comparable static and dynamic network descriptions, albeit with MEG offering some increased sensitivity and reproducibility. Such RSNs and their comparability across the two modalities remained consistent qualitatively but not quantitatively when the data were reconstructed without subject-specific structural MRI images.

Human Brain MappingVol. 45(13)
University of Oxford (GB), Wellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging (GB)
Wellcome Trust, Dementias Platform UK, Medical Research Council, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Neural dynamics and brain function
4.46
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.