Benchmarking the utility of dry-electrode electroencephalography for clinical trials

This study investigated if new dry-electrode technologies for electroencephalography (EEG) can substantially lower patient and site burden in clinical trials while maintaining adequate data quality. We benchmarked three dry-electrode EEG devices against a standard EEG using typical clinical trial procedures and EEG tasks that are often used for biomarker purposes. We found that dry-electrode EEG can perform on par with standard EEG for a range of different applications. However, both the participant and technician acceptance varied strongly across devices. Dry-electrode EEG was able to only match the comfort of standard EEG at best but was faster and easier to work with. Consequently, dry-electrode EEG was ranked among the most and least preferred options. The quantitative performance of dry-electrode EEG varied strongly across different applications. For example, quantitative resting state EEG and P300 evoked activity were adequately captured by dry-electrode EEG. However, certain signal aspects, such as low frequency activity (< 6 Hz) and induced gamma activity (40-80 Hz) presented notable challenges for dry-electrode EEG. Our findings suggest that dry-electrode EEG can substantially improve clinical trial applications of EEG, if the device and its context of use are carefully matched.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Reports
Published
2025-09-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-18184-7
Primary Topic
EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

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

Benchmarking the utility of dry-electrode electroencephalography for clinical trials

Joseph Paillard, Joerg F. Hipp, David J. Hawellek, Laura Dubreuil-Vall et al.
Scientific Reports
EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
article

Benchmarking the utility of dry-electrode electroencephalography for clinical trials

Joseph Paillard, Joerg F. Hipp, David J. Hawellek, Laura Dubreuil-Vall, Philipp Bomatter
article en

Abstract

This study investigated if new dry-electrode technologies for electroencephalography (EEG) can substantially lower patient and site burden in clinical trials while maintaining adequate data quality. We benchmarked three dry-electrode EEG devices against a standard EEG using typical clinical trial procedures and EEG tasks that are often used for biomarker purposes. We found that dry-electrode EEG can perform on par with standard EEG for a range of different applications. However, both the participant and technician acceptance varied strongly across devices. Dry-electrode EEG was able to only match the comfort of standard EEG at best but was faster and easier to work with. Consequently, dry-electrode EEG was ranked among the most and least preferred options. The quantitative performance of dry-electrode EEG varied strongly across different applications. For example, quantitative resting state EEG and P300 evoked activity were adequately captured by dry-electrode EEG. However, certain signal aspects, such as low frequency activity (< 6 Hz) and induced gamma activity (40-80 Hz) presented notable challenges for dry-electrode EEG. Our findings suggest that dry-electrode EEG can substantially improve clinical trial applications of EEG, if the device and its context of use are carefully matched.

Scientific ReportsVol. 15(1)
Roche (Switzerland) (CH), Université Paris-Saclay (FR), Centre Inria de Saclay (FR), University of Edinburgh (GB)
F. Hoffmann-La Roche
Openalex Percentile: Top 73%
EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
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.