Reliability and Validity of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation–Electroencephalography Biomarkers
Biological Psychiatry: Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuroimaging, ISSN: 2451-9022, Vol: 8, Issue: 8, Page: 805-814
2023
- 13Citations
- 23Captures
- 1Mentions
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations13
- Citation Indexes13
- CrossRef1
- Captures23
- Readers23
- 23
- Mentions1
- News Mentions1
- News1
Most Recent News
New Findings from Stanford University Medical Center in the Area of Magnetic Field Therapy Reported (Reliability and Validity of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation-electroencephalography Biomarkers)
2023 OCT 13 (NewsRx) -- By a News Reporter-Staff News Editor at Medical Imaging Daily News -- Current study results on Complementary and Alternative Medicine
Review Description
Noninvasive brain stimulation and neuroimaging have revolutionized human neuroscience with a multitude of applications, including diagnostic subtyping, treatment optimization, and relapse prediction. It is therefore particularly relevant to identify robust and clinically valuable brain biomarkers linking symptoms to their underlying neural mechanisms. Brain biomarkers must be reproducible (i.e., have internal reliability) across similar experiments within a laboratory and be generalizable (i.e., have external reliability) across experimental setups, laboratories, brain regions, and disease states. However, reliability (internal and external) is not alone sufficient; biomarkers also must have validity. Validity describes closeness to a true measure of the underlying neural signal or disease state. We propose that these metrics, reliability and validity, should be evaluated and optimized before any biomarker is used to inform treatment decisions. Here, we discuss these metrics with respect to causal brain connectivity biomarkers from coupling transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) with electroencephalography (EEG). We discuss controversies around TMS-EEG stemming from the multiple large off-target components (noise) and relatively weak genuine brain responses (signal), as is unfortunately often the case in noninvasive human neuroscience. We review the current state of TMS-EEG recordings, which consist of a mix of reliable noise and unreliable signal. We describe methods for evaluating TMS-EEG biomarkers, including how to assess internal and external reliability across facilities, cognitive states, brain networks, and disorders and how to validate these biomarkers using invasive neural recordings or treatment response. We provide recommendations to increase reliability and validity, discuss lessons learned, and suggest future directions for the field.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2451902222003408; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bpsc.2022.12.005; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85163573395&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36894435; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S2451902222003408; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bpsc.2022.12.005
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know