ArticleBrain and behavior2026
Reducing Cranial Morphology Error in F3 Scalp Localization: Comparison of Heuristic and Regression-Based Methods.
Article in Brain and behavior, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeAccurate localization of the F3 scalp position is essential for targeting the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), particularly when neuronavigation is unavailable. However, simplified scalp-based heuristic methods may lead to clinically relevant targeting errors due to substantial interindividual variability in cranial morphology. In this context, this study evaluates the geometric accuracy of commonly used and newly proposed scalp-based approaches for localizing the F3 position within the International 10-20 system. Specifically, it examines the impact of cranial morphological variability on localization error and assesses whether individualized regression-based methods can improve targeting accuracy compared to traditional heuristic techniques.
methodThe intrinsic geometric accuracy of five F3 localization methods was systematically compared: BeamF3, Adjusted BeamF3, the Scalp Geometry-based Parameter (SGP) method, NeurallyF3, and a newly developed approach EPlacementF3. A total of 250 anatomically realistic and morphologically diverse 3D head models (125 female, 125 male), generated using the HumanShape platform, were analyzed. Localization error was quantified as the Euclidean distance between each estimated F3 position and the reference coordinate defined by the International 10-20 system.
findingsBeamF3 and Adjusted BeamF3 showed the highest localization errors (mean >5.5 mm and >8 mm, respectively), while the SGP method improved accuracy (≈2.4 mm). In contrast, NeurallyF3 and EPlacementF3 achieved submillimetric errors across sexes. EPlacementF3 demonstrated the best overall performance, with the lowest mean error (∼0.2 mm) and consistent results in the independent validation dataset. These findings highlight the strong influence of cranial morphology on heuristic methods and the superior robustness of individualized regression-based approaches.
conclusionCommonly used heuristic methods do not reliably recover the true F3 position across heterogeneous cranial morphologies. In contrast, individualized regression-based approaches substantially reduce morphology-related error, supporting more accurate and scalable MRI-free targeting for rTMS and other non-invasive brain stimulation applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.