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 *

161 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23545283)

  • 1. Dynamic state allocation for MEG source reconstruction.
    Woolrich MW; Baker A; Luckhoo H; Mohseni H; Barnes G; Brookes M; Rezek I
    Neuroimage; 2013 Aug; 77():77-92. PubMed ID: 23545283
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Microstates and power envelope hidden Markov modeling probe bursting brain activity at different timescales.
    Coquelet N; De Tiège X; Roshchupkina L; Peigneux P; Goldman S; Woolrich M; Wens V
    Neuroimage; 2022 Feb; 247():118850. PubMed ID: 34954027
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Dynamic analysis on simultaneous iEEG-MEG data via hidden Markov model.
    Zhang S; Cao C; Quinn A; Vivekananda U; Zhan S; Liu W; Sun B; Woolrich M; Lu Q; Litvak V
    Neuroimage; 2021 Jun; 233():117923. PubMed ID: 33662572
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Source localization with MEG data: A beamforming approach based on covariance thresholding.
    Zhang J; Liu C; Green G
    Biometrics; 2014 Mar; 70(1):121-31. PubMed ID: 24350784
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The impact of MEG source reconstruction method on source-space connectivity estimation: A comparison between minimum-norm solution and beamforming.
    Hincapié AS; Kujala J; Mattout J; Pascarella A; Daligault S; Delpuech C; Mery D; Cosmelli D; Jerbi K
    Neuroimage; 2017 Aug; 156():29-42. PubMed ID: 28479475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Automated model selection in covariance estimation and spatial whitening of MEG and EEG signals.
    Engemann DA; Gramfort A
    Neuroimage; 2015 Mar; 108():328-42. PubMed ID: 25541187
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Modified covariance beamformer for solving MEG inverse problem in the environment with correlated sources.
    Kuznetsova A; Nurislamova Y; Ossadtchi A
    Neuroimage; 2021 Mar; 228():117677. PubMed ID: 33385549
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Hierarchical multiscale Bayesian algorithm for robust MEG/EEG source reconstruction.
    Cai C; Sekihara K; Nagarajan SS
    Neuroimage; 2018 Dec; 183():698-715. PubMed ID: 30059734
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Hyperedge bundling: A practical solution to spurious interactions in MEG/EEG source connectivity analyses.
    Wang SH; Lobier M; Siebenhühner F; Puoliväli T; Palva S; Palva JM
    Neuroimage; 2018 Jun; 173():610-622. PubMed ID: 29378318
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Phase shift invariant imaging of coherent sources (PSIICOS) from MEG data.
    Ossadtchi A; Altukhov D; Jerbi K
    Neuroimage; 2018 Dec; 183():950-971. PubMed ID: 30142449
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Adaptive cortical parcellations for source reconstructed EEG/MEG connectomes.
    Farahibozorg SR; Henson RN; Hauk O
    Neuroimage; 2018 Apr; 169():23-45. PubMed ID: 28893608
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Predictive regression modeling with MEG/EEG: from source power to signals and cognitive states.
    Sabbagh D; Ablin P; Varoquaux G; Gramfort A; Engemann DA
    Neuroimage; 2020 Nov; 222():116893. PubMed ID: 32439535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Truncated RAP-MUSIC (TRAP-MUSIC) for MEG and EEG source localization.
    Mäkelä N; Stenroos M; Sarvas J; Ilmoniemi RJ
    Neuroimage; 2018 Feb; 167():73-83. PubMed ID: 29128542
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Influence of the head model on EEG and MEG source connectivity analyses.
    Cho JH; Vorwerk J; Wolters CH; Knösche TR
    Neuroimage; 2015 Apr; 110():60-77. PubMed ID: 25638756
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Simultaneous EEG and MEG source reconstruction in sparse electromagnetic source imaging.
    Ding L; Yuan H
    Hum Brain Mapp; 2013 Apr; 34(4):775-95. PubMed ID: 22102512
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A framework for the design of flexible cross-talk functions for spatial filtering of EEG/MEG data: DeFleCT.
    Hauk O; Stenroos M
    Hum Brain Mapp; 2014 Apr; 35(4):1642-53. PubMed ID: 23616402
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Examining the effects of one- and three-dimensional spatial filtering analyses in magnetoencephalography.
    Johnson S; Prendergast G; Hymers M; Green G
    PLoS One; 2011; 6(8):e22251. PubMed ID: 21857916
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Multi-session statistics on beamformed MEG data.
    Luckhoo HT; Brookes MJ; Woolrich MW
    Neuroimage; 2014 Jul; 95(100):330-5. PubMed ID: 24412400
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.