Detecting synchrony in EEG: A comparative study of functional connectivity measures

In neuroscience, there is considerable current interest in investigating the connections between different parts of the brain. EEG is one modality for examining brain function, with advantages such as high temporal resolution and low cost. Many measures of connectivity have been proposed, but which...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Computers in biology and medicine 2019-02, Vol.105, p.1-15
Hauptverfasser: Bakhshayesh, Hanieh, Fitzgibbon, Sean P., Janani, Azin S., Grummett, Tyler S., Pope, Kenneth J.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 15
container_issue
container_start_page 1
container_title Computers in biology and medicine
container_volume 105
creator Bakhshayesh, Hanieh
Fitzgibbon, Sean P.
Janani, Azin S.
Grummett, Tyler S.
Pope, Kenneth J.
description In neuroscience, there is considerable current interest in investigating the connections between different parts of the brain. EEG is one modality for examining brain function, with advantages such as high temporal resolution and low cost. Many measures of connectivity have been proposed, but which is the best measure to use? In this paper, we address part of this question: which measure is best able to detect connections that do exist, in the challenging situation of non-stationary and noisy data from nonlinear systems, like EEG. This requires knowledge of the true relationship between signals, hence we compare 26 measures of functional connectivity on simulated data (unidirectionally coupled Hénon maps, and simulated EEG). To determine whether synchrony is detected, surrogate data were generated and analysed, and a threshold determined from the surrogate ensemble. No measure performed best in all tested situations. The correlation and coherence measures performed best on stationary data with many samples. S-estimator, correntropy, mean-phase coherence (Hilbert), mutual information (kernel), nonlinear interdependence (S) and nonlinear interdependence (N) performed most reliably on non-stationary data with small to medium window sizes. Of these, correlation and S-estimator have execution times that scale slower with the number of channels and the number of samples. •Extensive comparative study of 26 functional connectivity measures for EEG.•Measures compared on simulated noisy and nonstationary data.•Surrogates used to determine threshold for significant connectivity.•8 measures performed well, choice of best depends on the particular situation.•Correlation coefficient and S-estimator measures performed best overall.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2018.12.005
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2158562299</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0010482518304037</els_id><sourcerecordid>2172623086</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c468t-ea60fc029b65af73aa5b176d15bdb02c06e07f305c05f23de073a19d79470b1b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkE1P4zAQhq0VaNtl9y8gS1y4JIydOB_c-OgCEhIH2LPlOJPFVWMXO6mUf4-jUiFxQT5Y1jyvZ-YhhDJIGbDiYp1q128b43psUw6sShlPAcQPsmRVWScgsvyILAEYJHnFxYL8CmENADlk8JMsMhAFj2dJnm9xQD0Y-5-GyepX7-xEjaWr1d0lvaJzG-XVYHZIwzC2E3Ud7UYbE86qTaxbO8d3ZphojyqMHsNvctypTcA_H_cJ-fd39XJznzw-3T3cXD0mOi-qIUFVQKeB100hVFdmSomGlUXLRNM2wDUUCGUXR9UgOp618ZUpVrdlnZfQsCY7Ief7f7fevY0YBtmboHGzURbdGCRnoop78rqO6NkXdO1GHzeYqTKqyKAqIlXtKe1dCB47ufWmV36SDOQsXq7lp3g5i5eMyyg-Rk8_GozNXDsED6YjcL0HMBrZGfQyaINWY2t8NChbZ77v8g5aipkY</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2172623086</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Detecting synchrony in EEG: A comparative study of functional connectivity measures</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><source>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</source><creator>Bakhshayesh, Hanieh ; Fitzgibbon, Sean P. ; Janani, Azin S. ; Grummett, Tyler S. ; Pope, Kenneth J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Bakhshayesh, Hanieh ; Fitzgibbon, Sean P. ; Janani, Azin S. ; Grummett, Tyler S. ; Pope, Kenneth J.</creatorcontrib><description>In neuroscience, there is considerable current interest in investigating the connections between different parts of the brain. EEG is one modality for examining brain function, with advantages such as high temporal resolution and low cost. Many measures of connectivity have been proposed, but which is the best measure to use? In this paper, we address part of this question: which measure is best able to detect connections that do exist, in the challenging situation of non-stationary and noisy data from nonlinear systems, like EEG. This requires knowledge of the true relationship between signals, hence we compare 26 measures of functional connectivity on simulated data (unidirectionally coupled Hénon maps, and simulated EEG). To determine whether synchrony is detected, surrogate data were generated and analysed, and a threshold determined from the surrogate ensemble. No measure performed best in all tested situations. The correlation and coherence measures performed best on stationary data with many samples. S-estimator, correntropy, mean-phase coherence (Hilbert), mutual information (kernel), nonlinear interdependence (S) and nonlinear interdependence (N) performed most reliably on non-stationary data with small to medium window sizes. Of these, correlation and S-estimator have execution times that scale slower with the number of channels and the number of samples. •Extensive comparative study of 26 functional connectivity measures for EEG.•Measures compared on simulated noisy and nonstationary data.•Surrogates used to determine threshold for significant connectivity.•8 measures performed well, choice of best depends on the particular situation.•Correlation coefficient and S-estimator measures performed best overall.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0010-4825</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-0534</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2018.12.005</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30562626</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Biomedical signal processing ; Brain ; Brain - physiology ; Brain research ; Comparative studies ; Connectivity ; Correlation analysis ; Data processing ; EEG ; Electroencephalography ; Humans ; Models, Neurological ; Nervous system ; Neural networks ; Noise ; Nonlinear systems ; Nonstationarity ; Phase coherence ; Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted ; Temporal resolution ; Wavelet transforms</subject><ispartof>Computers in biology and medicine, 2019-02, Vol.105, p.1-15</ispartof><rights>2018 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Limited Feb 2019</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c468t-ea60fc029b65af73aa5b176d15bdb02c06e07f305c05f23de073a19d79470b1b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c468t-ea60fc029b65af73aa5b176d15bdb02c06e07f305c05f23de073a19d79470b1b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2172623086?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,3551,27929,27930,46000,64390,64392,64394,72474</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30562626$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bakhshayesh, Hanieh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fitzgibbon, Sean P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Janani, Azin S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grummett, Tyler S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pope, Kenneth J.</creatorcontrib><title>Detecting synchrony in EEG: A comparative study of functional connectivity measures</title><title>Computers in biology and medicine</title><addtitle>Comput Biol Med</addtitle><description>In neuroscience, there is considerable current interest in investigating the connections between different parts of the brain. EEG is one modality for examining brain function, with advantages such as high temporal resolution and low cost. Many measures of connectivity have been proposed, but which is the best measure to use? In this paper, we address part of this question: which measure is best able to detect connections that do exist, in the challenging situation of non-stationary and noisy data from nonlinear systems, like EEG. This requires knowledge of the true relationship between signals, hence we compare 26 measures of functional connectivity on simulated data (unidirectionally coupled Hénon maps, and simulated EEG). To determine whether synchrony is detected, surrogate data were generated and analysed, and a threshold determined from the surrogate ensemble. No measure performed best in all tested situations. The correlation and coherence measures performed best on stationary data with many samples. S-estimator, correntropy, mean-phase coherence (Hilbert), mutual information (kernel), nonlinear interdependence (S) and nonlinear interdependence (N) performed most reliably on non-stationary data with small to medium window sizes. Of these, correlation and S-estimator have execution times that scale slower with the number of channels and the number of samples. •Extensive comparative study of 26 functional connectivity measures for EEG.•Measures compared on simulated noisy and nonstationary data.•Surrogates used to determine threshold for significant connectivity.•8 measures performed well, choice of best depends on the particular situation.•Correlation coefficient and S-estimator measures performed best overall.</description><subject>Biomedical signal processing</subject><subject>Brain</subject><subject>Brain - physiology</subject><subject>Brain research</subject><subject>Comparative studies</subject><subject>Connectivity</subject><subject>Correlation analysis</subject><subject>Data processing</subject><subject>EEG</subject><subject>Electroencephalography</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Models, Neurological</subject><subject>Nervous system</subject><subject>Neural networks</subject><subject>Noise</subject><subject>Nonlinear systems</subject><subject>Nonstationarity</subject><subject>Phase coherence</subject><subject>Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted</subject><subject>Temporal resolution</subject><subject>Wavelet transforms</subject><issn>0010-4825</issn><issn>1879-0534</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkE1P4zAQhq0VaNtl9y8gS1y4JIydOB_c-OgCEhIH2LPlOJPFVWMXO6mUf4-jUiFxQT5Y1jyvZ-YhhDJIGbDiYp1q128b43psUw6sShlPAcQPsmRVWScgsvyILAEYJHnFxYL8CmENADlk8JMsMhAFj2dJnm9xQD0Y-5-GyepX7-xEjaWr1d0lvaJzG-XVYHZIwzC2E3Ud7UYbE86qTaxbO8d3ZphojyqMHsNvctypTcA_H_cJ-fd39XJznzw-3T3cXD0mOi-qIUFVQKeB100hVFdmSomGlUXLRNM2wDUUCGUXR9UgOp618ZUpVrdlnZfQsCY7Ief7f7fevY0YBtmboHGzURbdGCRnoop78rqO6NkXdO1GHzeYqTKqyKAqIlXtKe1dCB47ufWmV36SDOQsXq7lp3g5i5eMyyg-Rk8_GozNXDsED6YjcL0HMBrZGfQyaINWY2t8NChbZ77v8g5aipkY</recordid><startdate>201902</startdate><enddate>201902</enddate><creator>Bakhshayesh, Hanieh</creator><creator>Fitzgibbon, Sean P.</creator><creator>Janani, Azin S.</creator><creator>Grummett, Tyler S.</creator><creator>Pope, Kenneth J.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier Limited</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AL</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>K7-</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0N</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7Z</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201902</creationdate><title>Detecting synchrony in EEG: A comparative study of functional connectivity measures</title><author>Bakhshayesh, Hanieh ; Fitzgibbon, Sean P. ; Janani, Azin S. ; Grummett, Tyler S. ; Pope, Kenneth J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c468t-ea60fc029b65af73aa5b176d15bdb02c06e07f305c05f23de073a19d79470b1b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Biomedical signal processing</topic><topic>Brain</topic><topic>Brain - physiology</topic><topic>Brain research</topic><topic>Comparative studies</topic><topic>Connectivity</topic><topic>Correlation analysis</topic><topic>Data processing</topic><topic>EEG</topic><topic>Electroencephalography</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Models, Neurological</topic><topic>Nervous system</topic><topic>Neural networks</topic><topic>Noise</topic><topic>Nonlinear systems</topic><topic>Nonstationarity</topic><topic>Phase coherence</topic><topic>Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted</topic><topic>Temporal resolution</topic><topic>Wavelet transforms</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bakhshayesh, Hanieh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fitzgibbon, Sean P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Janani, Azin S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grummett, Tyler S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pope, Kenneth J.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Computing Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Computer Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Computing Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Biochemistry Abstracts 1</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Computers in biology and medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bakhshayesh, Hanieh</au><au>Fitzgibbon, Sean P.</au><au>Janani, Azin S.</au><au>Grummett, Tyler S.</au><au>Pope, Kenneth J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Detecting synchrony in EEG: A comparative study of functional connectivity measures</atitle><jtitle>Computers in biology and medicine</jtitle><addtitle>Comput Biol Med</addtitle><date>2019-02</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>105</volume><spage>1</spage><epage>15</epage><pages>1-15</pages><issn>0010-4825</issn><eissn>1879-0534</eissn><abstract>In neuroscience, there is considerable current interest in investigating the connections between different parts of the brain. EEG is one modality for examining brain function, with advantages such as high temporal resolution and low cost. Many measures of connectivity have been proposed, but which is the best measure to use? In this paper, we address part of this question: which measure is best able to detect connections that do exist, in the challenging situation of non-stationary and noisy data from nonlinear systems, like EEG. This requires knowledge of the true relationship between signals, hence we compare 26 measures of functional connectivity on simulated data (unidirectionally coupled Hénon maps, and simulated EEG). To determine whether synchrony is detected, surrogate data were generated and analysed, and a threshold determined from the surrogate ensemble. No measure performed best in all tested situations. The correlation and coherence measures performed best on stationary data with many samples. S-estimator, correntropy, mean-phase coherence (Hilbert), mutual information (kernel), nonlinear interdependence (S) and nonlinear interdependence (N) performed most reliably on non-stationary data with small to medium window sizes. Of these, correlation and S-estimator have execution times that scale slower with the number of channels and the number of samples. •Extensive comparative study of 26 functional connectivity measures for EEG.•Measures compared on simulated noisy and nonstationary data.•Surrogates used to determine threshold for significant connectivity.•8 measures performed well, choice of best depends on the particular situation.•Correlation coefficient and S-estimator measures performed best overall.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>30562626</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.compbiomed.2018.12.005</doi><tpages>15</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0010-4825
ispartof Computers in biology and medicine, 2019-02, Vol.105, p.1-15
issn 0010-4825
1879-0534
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2158562299
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete; ProQuest Central UK/Ireland
subjects Biomedical signal processing
Brain
Brain - physiology
Brain research
Comparative studies
Connectivity
Correlation analysis
Data processing
EEG
Electroencephalography
Humans
Models, Neurological
Nervous system
Neural networks
Noise
Nonlinear systems
Nonstationarity
Phase coherence
Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted
Temporal resolution
Wavelet transforms
title Detecting synchrony in EEG: A comparative study of functional connectivity measures
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-13T23%3A43%3A23IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Detecting%20synchrony%20in%20EEG:%20A%20comparative%20study%20of%20functional%20connectivity%20measures&rft.jtitle=Computers%20in%20biology%20and%20medicine&rft.au=Bakhshayesh,%20Hanieh&rft.date=2019-02&rft.volume=105&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=15&rft.pages=1-15&rft.issn=0010-4825&rft.eissn=1879-0534&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2018.12.005&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2172623086%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2172623086&rft_id=info:pmid/30562626&rft_els_id=S0010482518304037&rfr_iscdi=true