415 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1793687)
1. Source localization of EEG versus MEG: empirical comparison using visually evoked responses and theoretical considerations.
Lopes da Silva FH; Wieringa HJ; Peters MJ
Brain Topogr; 1991; 4(2):133-42. PubMed ID: 1793687
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Generators of visual evoked potentials investigated by dipole tracing in the human occipital cortex.
Ikeda H; Nishijo H; Miyamoto K; Tamura R; Endo S; Ono T
Neuroscience; 1998 Jun; 84(3):723-39. PubMed ID: 9579779
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Dipole source analysis for readiness potential and field using simultaneously measured EEG and MEG signals.
Mideksa KG; Hellriegel H; Hoogenboom N; Krause H; Schnitzler A; Deuschl G; Raethjen J; Heute U; Muthuraman M
Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc; 2013; 2013():1362-5. PubMed ID: 24109949
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Precision of dipole localization in a spherical volume conductor: a comparison of referential EEG, magnetoencephalography and scalp current density methods.
Murro AM; Smith JR; King DW; Park YD
Brain Topogr; 1995; 8(2):119-25. PubMed ID: 8793122
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A novel integrated MEG and EEG analysis method for dipolar sources.
Huang MX; Song T; Hagler DJ; Podgorny I; Jousmaki V; Cui L; Gaa K; Harrington DL; Dale AM; Lee RR; Elman J; Halgren E
Neuroimage; 2007 Sep; 37(3):731-48. PubMed ID: 17658272
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. High-resolution EEG source localization in personalized segmentation-free head model with multi-dipole fitting.
Hirata A; Niitsu M; Phang CR; Kodera S; Kida T; Rashed EA; Fukunaga M; Sadato N; Wasaka T
Phys Med Biol; 2024 Feb; 69(5):. PubMed ID: 38306964
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. The effect of stimulation type, head modeling, and combined EEG and MEG on the source reconstruction of the somatosensory P20/N20 component.
Antonakakis M; Schrader S; Wollbrink A; Oostenveld R; Rampp S; Haueisen J; Wolters CH
Hum Brain Mapp; 2019 Dec; 40(17):5011-5028. PubMed ID: 31397966
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Evaluation of a new MEG-EEG spatio-temporal localization approach using a realistic source model.
Schwartz DP; Badier JM; Bihoué P; Bouliou A
Brain Topogr; 1999; 11(4):279-89. PubMed ID: 10449259
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Interpreting abnormality: an EEG and MEG study of P50 and the auditory paired-stimulus paradigm.
Edgar JC; Huang MX; Weisend MP; Sherwood A; Miller GA; Adler LE; Cañive JM
Biol Psychol; 2003 Dec; 65(1):1-20. PubMed ID: 14638286
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Demonstration of useful differences between magnetoencephalogram and electroencephalogram.
Cohen D; Cuffin BN
Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol; 1983 Jul; 56(1):38-51. PubMed ID: 6190632
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Sensitivity of EEG and MEG measurements to tissue conductivity.
Gençer NG; Acar CE
Phys Med Biol; 2004 Mar; 49(5):701-17. PubMed ID: 15070197
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Source estimates for MEG/EEG visual evoked responses constrained by multiple, retinotopically-mapped stimulus locations.
Hagler DJ; Halgren E; Martinez A; Huang M; Hillyard SA; Dale AM
Hum Brain Mapp; 2009 Apr; 30(4):1290-309. PubMed ID: 18570197
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Linear inverse source estimate of combined EEG and MEG data related to voluntary movements.
Babiloni F; Carducci F; Cincotti F; Del Gratta C; Pizzella V; Romani GL; Rossini PM; Tecchio F; Babiloni C
Hum Brain Mapp; 2001 Dec; 14(4):197-209. PubMed ID: 11668651
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Anatomical constraints on source models for high-resolution EEG and MEG derived from MRI.
Srinivasan R
Technol Cancer Res Treat; 2006 Aug; 5(4):389-99. PubMed ID: 16866569
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. EEG versus MEG localization accuracy: theory and experiment.
Cohen D; Cuffin BN
Brain Topogr; 1991; 4(2):95-103. PubMed ID: 1793693
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Improved method for retinotopy constrained source estimation of visual-evoked responses.
Hagler DJ; Dale AM
Hum Brain Mapp; 2013 Mar; 34(3):665-83. PubMed ID: 22102418
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A comparative EEG/MEG equivalent dipole study of the pattern onset visual response.
Stok CJ; Spekreijse HJ; Peters MJ; Boom HB; Lopes da Silva FH
Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol Suppl; 1990; 41():34-50. PubMed ID: 2289449
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. EEG and MEG coherence: measures of functional connectivity at distinct spatial scales of neocortical dynamics.
Srinivasan R; Winter WR; Ding J; Nunez PL
J Neurosci Methods; 2007 Oct; 166(1):41-52. PubMed ID: 17698205
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Combined MEG and EEG source imaging by minimization of mutual information.
Baillet S; Garnero L; Marin G; Hugonin JP
IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 1999 May; 46(5):522-34. PubMed ID: 10230131
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. MEG versus EEG: influence of background activity on interictal spike detection.
Ramantani G; Boor R; Paetau R; Ille N; Feneberg R; Rupp A; Boppel T; Scherg M; Rating D; Bast T
J Clin Neurophysiol; 2006 Dec; 23(6):498-508. PubMed ID: 17143138
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
