122 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30927169)
1. In Vivo Estimation of Head Tissue Conductivities Using Bound Constrained Optimization.
Ouypornkochagorn T; Ouypornkochagorn S
Ann Biomed Eng; 2019 Jul; 47(7):1575-1583. PubMed ID: 30927169
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Effects of uncertainty in head tissue conductivity and complexity on EEG forward modeling in neonates.
Azizollahi H; Aarabi A; Wallois F
Hum Brain Mapp; 2016 Oct; 37(10):3604-22. PubMed ID: 27238749
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Determination of head conductivity frequency response in vivo with optimized EIT-EEG.
Dabek J; Kalogianni K; Rotgans E; van der Helm FCT; Kwakkel G; van Wegen EEH; Daffertshofer A; de Munck JC
Neuroimage; 2016 Feb; 127():484-495. PubMed ID: 26589336
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Skull Modeling Effects in Conductivity Estimates Using Parametric Electrical Impedance Tomography.
Fernandez-Corazza M; Turovets S; Luu P; Price N; Muravchik CH; Tucker D
IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 2018 Aug; 65(8):1785-1797. PubMed ID: 29989921
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Variation in Reported Human Head Tissue Electrical Conductivity Values.
McCann H; Pisano G; Beltrachini L
Brain Topogr; 2019 Sep; 32(5):825-858. PubMed ID: 31054104
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Estimation of the electric conductivity from scalp measurements: feasibility and application to source localization.
van Burik MJ; Peters MJ
Clin Neurophysiol; 2000 Aug; 111(8):1514-21. PubMed ID: 10904234
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The application of electrical impedance tomography to reduce systematic errors in the EEG inverse problem--a simulation study.
Gonçalves S; de Munck JC; Heethaar RM; Lopes da Silva FH; van Dijk BW
Physiol Meas; 2000 Aug; 21(3):379-93. PubMed ID: 10984206
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Use of anisotropic modelling in electrical impedance tomography: description of method and preliminary assessment of utility in imaging brain function in the adult human head.
Abascal JF; Arridge SR; Atkinson D; Horesh R; Fabrizi L; De Lucia M; Horesh L; Bayford RH; Holder DS
Neuroimage; 2008 Nov; 43(2):258-68. PubMed ID: 18694835
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Evaluation of the electric field in the brain during transcranial direct current stimulation: A sensitivity analysis.
Santos L; Martinho M; Salvador R; Wenger C; Fernandes SR; Ripolles O; Ruffini G; Miranda PC
Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc; 2016 Aug; 2016():1778-1781. PubMed ID: 28268672
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A new magnetic resonance electrical impedance tomography (MREIT) algorithm: the RSM-MREIT algorithm with applications to estimation of human head conductivity.
Gao N; Zhu SA; He B
Phys Med Biol; 2006 Jun; 51(12):3067-83. PubMed ID: 16757863
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. An oppositional biogeography-based optimization technique to reconstruct organ boundaries in the human thorax using electrical impedance tomography.
Rashid A; Kim BS; Khambampati AK; Kim S; Kim KY
Physiol Meas; 2011 Jul; 32(7):767-96. PubMed ID: 21646708
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Two-dimensional finite element modelling of the neonatal head.
Gibson A; Bayford RH; Holder DS
Physiol Meas; 2000 Feb; 21(1):45-52. PubMed ID: 10719998
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A guideline for head volume conductor modeling in EEG and MEG.
Vorwerk J; Cho JH; Rampp S; Hamer H; Knösche TR; Wolters CH
Neuroimage; 2014 Oct; 100():590-607. PubMed ID: 24971512
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A novel bounded EIT protocol to generate inhomogeneous skull conductivity maps non-invasively.
Fernandez-Corazza M; Turovets S; Muravchik CH
Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc; 2020 Jul; 2020():1440-1443. PubMed ID: 33018261
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Does participant's age impact on tDCS induced fields? Insights from computational simulations.
McCann H; Beltrachini L
Biomed Phys Eng Express; 2021 Jun; 7(4):. PubMed ID: 34038881
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Estimation of electrical conductivity distribution within the human head from magnetic flux density measurement.
Gao N; Zhu SA; He B
Phys Med Biol; 2005 Jun; 50(11):2675-87. PubMed ID: 15901962
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Influence of head models on EEG simulations and inverse source localizations.
Ramon C; Schimpf PH; Haueisen J
Biomed Eng Online; 2006 Feb; 5():10. PubMed ID: 16466570
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Dipole estimation errors due to not incorporating anisotropic conductivities in realistic head models for EEG source analysis.
Hallez H; Staelens S; Lemahieu I
Phys Med Biol; 2009 Oct; 54(20):6079-93. PubMed ID: 19779215
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Influence of head tissue conductivity in forward and inverse magnetoencephalographic simulations using realistic head models.
Van Uitert R; Johnson C; Zhukov L
IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 2004 Dec; 51(12):2129-37. PubMed ID: 15605860
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Neonatal EEG at scalp is focal and implies high skull conductivity in realistic neonatal head models.
Odabaee M; Tokariev A; Layeghy S; Mesbah M; Colditz PB; Ramon C; Vanhatalo S
Neuroimage; 2014 Aug; 96():73-80. PubMed ID: 24736169
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
