182 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20697790)
1. Comparative power spectral analysis of simultaneous elecroencephalographic and magnetoencephalographic recordings in humans suggests non-resistive extracellular media.
Dehghani N; Bédard C; Cash SS; Halgren E; Destexhe A
J Comput Neurosci; 2010 Dec; 29(3):405-21. PubMed ID: 20697790
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparative power spectral analysis of simultaneous electroencephalographic and magnetoencephalographic recordings in humans suggests non-resistive extracellular media : EEG and MEG power spectra.
Dehghani N; Bédard C; Cash SS; Halgren E; Destexhe A
J Comput Neurosci; 2010 Jun; ():. PubMed ID: 20556640
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Differences in MEG and EEG power-law scaling explained by a coupling between spatial coherence and frequency: a simulation study.
Bénar CG; Grova C; Jirsa VK; Lina JM
J Comput Neurosci; 2019 Aug; 47(1):31-41. PubMed ID: 31292816
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A framework to reconcile frequency scaling measurements, from intracellular recordings, local-field potentials, up to EEG and MEG signals.
Bedard C; Gomes JM; Bal T; Destexhe A
J Integr Neurosci; 2017; 16(1):3-18. PubMed ID: 28891497
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Measuring the cortical correlation structure of spontaneous oscillatory activity with EEG and MEG.
Siems M; Pape AA; Hipp JF; Siegel M
Neuroimage; 2016 Apr; 129():345-355. PubMed ID: 26827813
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Magnetoencephalography demonstrates multiple asynchronous generators during human sleep spindles.
Dehghani N; Cash SS; Rossetti AO; Chen CC; Halgren E
J Neurophysiol; 2010 Jul; 104(1):179-88. PubMed ID: 20427615
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Ultra-low-noise EEG/MEG systems enable bimodal non-invasive detection of spike-like human somatosensory evoked responses at 1 kHz.
Fedele T; Scheer HJ; Burghoff M; Curio G; Körber R
Physiol Meas; 2015 Feb; 36(2):357-68. PubMed ID: 25612926
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. Modality-specific spike identification in simultaneous magnetoencephalography/electroencephalography: a methodological approach.
Zijlmans M; Huiskamp GM; Leijten FS; Van Der Meij WM; Wieneke G; Van Huffelen AC
J Clin Neurophysiol; 2002 Jun; 19(3):183-91. PubMed ID: 12226563
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Spatial neuronal synchronization and the waveform of oscillations: Implications for EEG and MEG.
Schaworonkow N; Nikulin VV
PLoS Comput Biol; 2019 May; 15(5):e1007055. PubMed ID: 31086368
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Dynamic causal modelling of induced responses.
Chen CC; Kiebel SJ; Friston KJ
Neuroimage; 2008 Jul; 41(4):1293-312. PubMed ID: 18485744
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Magnetoencephalography in healthy neonates.
Haddad N; Shihabuddin B; Preissl H; Holst M; Lowery CL; Eswaran H
Clin Neurophysiol; 2006 Feb; 117(2):289-94. PubMed ID: 16414000
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. Mapping the signal-to-noise-ratios of cortical sources in magnetoencephalography and electroencephalography.
Goldenholz DM; Ahlfors SP; Hämäläinen MS; Sharon D; Ishitobi M; Vaina LM; Stufflebeam SM
Hum Brain Mapp; 2009 Apr; 30(4):1077-86. PubMed ID: 18465745
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Permutation Statistics for Connectivity Analysis between Regions of Interest in EEG and MEG Data.
Mamashli F; Hämäläinen M; Ahveninen J; Kenet T; Khan S
Sci Rep; 2019 May; 9(1):7942. PubMed ID: 31138854
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Simultaneous recording of MEG, EEG and intracerebral EEG during visual stimulation: from feasibility to single-trial analysis.
Dubarry AS; Badier JM; Trébuchon-Da Fonseca A; Gavaret M; Carron R; Bartolomei F; Liégeois-Chauvel C; Régis J; Chauvel P; Alario FX; Bénar CG
Neuroimage; 2014 Oct; 99():548-58. PubMed ID: 24862073
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Magnetoencephalography signals are influenced by skull defects.
Lau S; Flemming L; Haueisen J
Clin Neurophysiol; 2014 Aug; 125(8):1653-62. PubMed ID: 24418220
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparing the potential of MEG and EEG to uncover brain tracking of speech temporal envelope.
Destoky F; Philippe M; Bertels J; Verhasselt M; Coquelet N; Vander Ghinst M; Wens V; De Tiège X; Bourguignon M
Neuroimage; 2019 Jan; 184():201-213. PubMed ID: 30205208
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Source cancellation profiles of electroencephalography and magnetoencephalography.
Irimia A; Van Horn JD; Halgren E
Neuroimage; 2012 Feb; 59(3):2464-74. PubMed ID: 21959078
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A mathematical approach to the temporal stationarity of background noise in MEG/EEG measurements.
Bijma F; de Munck JC; Huizenga HM; Heethaar RM
Neuroimage; 2003 Sep; 20(1):233-43. PubMed ID: 14527584
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
