Cited by 417Functional Brain Connectivity StudiesNeural dynamics and brain functionEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces

Opportunities and methodological challenges in EEG and MEG resting state functional brain network research

Open access
van Diessen, E., Numan, T., van Dellen, E., van der Kooi, A.W., Boersma, M., Hofman, D., van Lutterveld, R., van Dijk, B.W. +3 more·2015·Clinical Neurophysiology

Abstract

Electroencephalogram (EEG) and magnetoencephalogram (MEG) recordings during resting state are increasingly used to study functional connectivity and network topology. Moreover, the number of different analysis approaches is expanding along with the rising interest in this research area. The comparison between studies can therefore be challenging and discussion is needed to underscore methodological opportunities and pitfalls in functional connectivity and network studies. In this overview we discuss methodological considerations throughout the analysis pipeline of recording and analyzing resting state EEG and MEG data, with a focus on functional connectivity and network analysis. We summarize current common practices with their advantages and disadvantages; provide practical tips, and suggestions for future research. Finally, we discuss how methodological choices in resting state research can affect the construction of functional networks. When taking advantage of current best practices and avoid the most obvious pitfalls, functional connectivity and network studies can be improved and enable a more accurate interpretation and comparison between studies.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.clinph.2014.11.018

Cites

196 of 196 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
van Diessen, E., Numan, T., van Dellen, E., van der Kooi, A. W., Boersma, M., Hofman, D., van Lutterveld, R., van Dijk, B. W., van Straaten, E. C. W., Hillebrand, A., & Stam, C. J.
Affiliations
  • University Medical Center Utrecht (NL)
  • Utrecht University (NL)
  • Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL)
Venue
Clinical Neurophysiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-08
Volume
126
Issue
8
Pages
1468-1481
ISSN
1388-2457 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2079426910
Cited by
417
References
196
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 49 · 2024: 37 · 2023: 45 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 45 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 45 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 34 · 2016: 28 · 2015: 12 · 2012: 1
FWCI
2.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Clinical Neurophysiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (publishedVersion)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion)
  • VU Research Portal (submittedVersion)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Dutch National Epilepsy Fund
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Keywords
resting state, functional connectivity, brain networks, EEG, MEG, network topology, methodological pitfalls, data analysis pipeline
MeSH terms
Brain, Brain Mapping, Electroencephalography, Humans, Nerve Net, Neurons, Magnetoencephalography, Functional Neuroimaging

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review