These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

172 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1793688)

  • 1. Use of prior knowledge in brain electromagnetic source analysis.
    Scherg M; Berg P
    Brain Topogr; 1991; 4(2):143-50. PubMed ID: 1793688
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Combined mapping of human auditory EEG and MEG responses.
    Huotilainen M; Winkler I; Alho K; Escera C; Virtanen J; Ilmoniemi RJ; Jääskeläinen IP; Pekkonen E; Näätänen R
    Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol; 1998 Jul; 108(4):370-9. PubMed ID: 9714379
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Empirical Bayes evaluation of fused EEG-MEG source reconstruction: Application to auditory mismatch evoked responses.
    Lecaignard F; Bertrand O; Caclin A; Mattout J
    Neuroimage; 2021 Feb; 226():117468. PubMed ID: 33075561
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Source estimation of spontaneous MEG activity and auditory evoked responses in normal subjects during sleep.
    Iramina K; Ueno S
    Brain Topogr; 1996; 8(3):297-301. PubMed ID: 8728422
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A test of brain electrical source analysis (BESA): a simulation study.
    Miltner W; Braun C; Johnson R; Simpson GV; Ruchkin DS
    Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol; 1994 Oct; 91(4):295-310. PubMed ID: 7523079
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. The MMN is a derivative of the auditory N100 response.
    May PJ; Tiitinen H
    Neurol Clin Neurophysiol; 2004 Nov; 2004():20. PubMed ID: 16012601
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Separate time behaviors of the temporal and frontal mismatch negativity sources.
    Rinne T; Alho K; Ilmoniemi RJ; Virtanen J; Näätänen R
    Neuroimage; 2000 Jul; 12(1):14-9. PubMed ID: 10875898
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Removal of magnetoencephalographic artifacts with temporal signal-space separation: demonstration with single-trial auditory-evoked responses.
    Taulu S; Hari R
    Hum Brain Mapp; 2009 May; 30(5):1524-34. PubMed ID: 18661502
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Sparsity enables estimation of both subcortical and cortical activity from MEG and EEG.
    Krishnaswamy P; Obregon-Henao G; Ahveninen J; Khan S; Babadi B; Iglesias JE; Hämäläinen MS; Purdon PL
    Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2017 Nov; 114(48):E10465-E10474. PubMed ID: 29138310
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Sensitivity of EEG and MEG to the N1 and P2 auditory evoked responses modulated by spectral complexity of sounds.
    Shahin AJ; Roberts LE; Miller LM; McDonald KL; Alain C
    Brain Topogr; 2007; 20(2):55-61. PubMed ID: 17899352
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Dynamical causal modelling for M/EEG: spatial and temporal symmetry constraints.
    Fastenrath M; Friston KJ; Kiebel SJ
    Neuroimage; 2009 Jan; 44(1):154-63. PubMed ID: 18718870
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. EEG minimum-norm estimation compared with MEG dipole fitting in the localization of somatosensory sources at S1.
    Komssi S; Huttunen J; Aronen HJ; Ilmoniemi RJ
    Clin Neurophysiol; 2004 Mar; 115(3):534-42. PubMed ID: 15036048
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Modeling extended sources of event-related potentials using anatomical and physiological constraints.
    Kincses WE; Braun C; Kaiser S; Elbert T
    Hum Brain Mapp; 1999; 8(4):182-93. PubMed ID: 10619413
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Localization of human supratemporal auditory areas from intracerebral auditory evoked potentials using distributed source models.
    Yvert B; Fischer C; Bertrand O; Pernier J
    Neuroimage; 2005 Oct; 28(1):140-53. PubMed ID: 16039144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Dissociable auditory mismatch response and connectivity patterns in adolescents with schizophrenia and adolescents with bipolar disorder with psychosis: A magnetoencephalography study.
    Braeutigam S; Dima D; Frangou S; James A
    Schizophr Res; 2018 Mar; 193():313-318. PubMed ID: 28760539
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The spatio-temporal dynamics of deviance and target detection in the passive and active auditory oddball paradigm: a sLORETA study.
    Justen C; Herbert C
    BMC Neurosci; 2018 Apr; 19(1):25. PubMed ID: 29673322
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. A visual study of surface potentials and Laplacians due to distributed neocortical sources: computer simulations and evoked potentials.
    Nunez PL; Pilgreen KL; Westdorp AF; Law SK; Nelson AV
    Brain Topogr; 1991; 4(2):151-68. PubMed ID: 1793689
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparing the Performance of Popular MEG/EEG Artifact Correction Methods in an Evoked-Response Study.
    Haumann NT; Parkkonen L; Kliuchko M; Vuust P; Brattico E
    Comput Intell Neurosci; 2016; 2016():7489108. PubMed ID: 27524998
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.