Reliability of fully automated versus visually controlled pre- and post-processing of resting-state EEG
Reliability of fully automated versus visually controlled pre- and post-processing of resting-state EEG
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.clinph.2014.05.014
复制
发表时间：
2015-02-01
影响因子：
4.7
通讯作者：
Fuhr, P.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hatz, F.;Hardmeier, M.;Fuhr, P.
目的：比较新开发的Matlab (R)工具箱用于静息状态脑电图全自动前后处理（automated analysis， AA）与目控前后处理（VA）分析的可靠性。方法：34名健康志愿者，年龄中位数38.2岁（20-49岁），女性82%，每隔1年连续3次256通道静息状态脑电图。比较AA和VA的频率分析结果的Pearson相关系数，并采用类内相关系数（intraclass correlation coefficients， ICC）评估随时间的信度。结果：AA与VA的平均相关系数为0.94 +/- 0.07，AA的平均ICC为0.83 +/- 0.05，VA的平均ICC为0.84 +/- 0.07。结论：AA法和VA法对脑电图谱分析结果非常相似，可靠性相同。AA更节省时间，完全标准化，独立于评级员和他们的培训。意义：脑电图的自动化处理简化了脑电图定量分析的工作流程。(C) 2014年国际临床神经生理学联合会。爱思唯尔爱尔兰有限公司出版。版权所有。
Objective: To compare the reliability of a newly developed Matlab (R) toolbox for the fully automated, pre-and post-processing of resting state EEG (automated analysis, AA) with the reliability of analysis involving visually controlled pre-and post-processing (VA).Methods: 34 healthy volunteers (age: median 38.2 (20-49), 82% female) had three consecutive 256-channel resting-state EEG at one year intervals. Results of frequency analysis of AA and VA were compared with Pearson correlation coefficients, and reliability over time was assessed with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC).Results: Mean correlation coefficient between AA and VA was 0.94 +/- 0.07, mean ICC for AA 0.83 +/- 0.05 and for VA 0.84 +/- 0.07.Conclusion: AA and VA yield very similar results for spectral EEG analysis and are equally reliable. AA is less time-consuming, completely standardized, and independent of raters and their training.Significance: Automated processing of EEG facilitates workflow in quantitative EEG analysis. (C) 2014 International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.