Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41383985›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2025

EEG microstate analysis between patients with major depressive disorder, subclinical depression, and healthy controls.

Jinwon Chang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

1 author.

Jinwon ChangWilliams College, Williamstown, MA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Electroencephalography (EEG) microstates have emerged as potential biomarkers of large-scale brain network dynamics. However, their role in depression remains unclear due to inconsistent findings and limited replication. This study investigated whether microstate parameters can differentiate depression. Methods: Resting-state EEG was analyzed from 122 young adults [76 controls, 23 subclinical depression, 23 major depressive disorder (MDD)]. Microstate analysis was conducted using standardized pipelines (MICROSTATELAB in EEGLAB), with duration, occurrence, and coverage extracted for six-class solutions. Group differences were assessed using Bayesian ANCOVA, while associations with depressive and anxiety symptoms (BDI, STAI) were evaluated with Bayesian regression. Replication analyses were performed using a second independent EEG recording. Test-retest reliability was assessed with intraclass correlation coefficients. Results and discussion: Microstate G duration was reduced in both subclinical and high-symptom groups compared with controls and showed negative associations with BDI and STAI scores. These effects are partially replicated in the second dataset. Microstate G also demonstrated high test-retest reliability (ICC=0.842). In contrast, microstate A showed weaker and less reliable associations with depressive symptoms. Microstate G represents a reliable electrophysiological marker of depressive symptomatology. These findings highlight EEG microstate analysis as a promising approach for developing objective, dimensional biomarkers of depression.

Indexed as

depressionElectroencephalographymajor depressive disordermicrostatereliability

Identifiers

PMID41383985
PMCPMC12689945

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.