Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35741673›Full record

ReviewBrain sciences2022

A Brief Introduction to Magnetoencephalography (MEG) and Its Clinical Applications.

Alfred Lenin Fred, Subbiahpillai Neelakantapillai Kumar, Ajay Kumar Haridhas, Sayantan Ghosh, Harishita Purushothaman Bhuvana, Wei Khang Jeremy Sim, Vijayaragavan Vimalan, Fredin Arun Sedly Givo, Veikko Jousmäki, Parasuraman Padmanabhan and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brain sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
8.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 82 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.

Alfred Lenin FredDepartment of CSE, Mar Ephraem College of Engineering and Technology, Marthandam 629171, Tamil Nadu, India.
Subbiahpillai Neelakantapillai KumarDepartment of EEE, Amal Jyothi College of Engineering, Kanjirappally 686518, Kerala, India.ORCID 0000-0002-2530-1454
Ajay Kumar HaridhasDepartment of ECE, Mar Ephraem College of Engineering and Technology, Marthandam 629171, Tamil Nadu, India.ORCID 0000-0003-0112-6118
Sayantan GhoshDepartment of Integrative Biology, Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore 632014, Tamil Nadu, India.
Harishita Purushothaman BhuvanaCognitive Neuroimaging Centre, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 636921, Singapore.
Wei Khang Jeremy SimCognitive Neuroimaging Centre, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 636921, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-5695-1310
Vijayaragavan VimalanCognitive Neuroimaging Centre, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 636921, Singapore.
Fredin Arun Sedly GivoDepartment of CSE, Mar Ephraem College of Engineering and Technology, Marthandam 629171, Tamil Nadu, India.ORCID 0000-0002-4460-0126
Veikko JousmäkiCognitive Neuroimaging Centre, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 636921, Singapore.
Parasuraman PadmanabhanCognitive Neuroimaging Centre, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 636921, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0003-4112-4600
Balázs GulyásCognitive Neuroimaging Centre, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 636921, Singapore.
Nanyang Technological University · SGAmal Jyothi College of EngineeringVellore Institute of Technology University · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Magnetoencephalography (MEG) plays a pivotal role in the diagnosis of brain disorders. In this review, we have investigated potential MEG applications for analysing brain disorders. The signal-to-noise ratio (SNRMEG = 2.2 db, SNREEG < 1 db) and spatial resolution (SRMEG = 2−3 mm, SREEG = 7−10 mm) is higher for MEG than EEG, thus MEG potentially facilitates accurate monitoring of cortical activity. We found that the direct electrophysiological MEG signals reflected the physiological status of neurological disorders and play a vital role in disease diagnosis. Single-channel connectivity, as well as brain network analysis, using MEG data acquired during resting state and a given task has been used for the diagnosis of neurological disorders such as epilepsy, Alzheimer’s, Parkinsonism, autism, and schizophrenia. The workflow of MEG and its potential applications in the diagnosis of disease and therapeutic planning are also discussed. We forecast that computer-aided algorithms will play a prominent role in the diagnosis and prediction of neurological diseases in the future. The outcome of this narrative review will aid researchers to utilise MEG in diagnostics.

Indexed as

brain connectivitybrain networkclinical applicationcomputer-aided algorithmsdiagnosticelectrophysiologymagnetoencephalography (MEG)neurological disordertherapeutic

Identifiers

PMID35741673
PMCPMC9221302
OpenAlexW4282973393

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.