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 *

116 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3823144)

  • 1. A method for combining MEG and EEG to determine the sources.
    Cohen D; Cuffin BN
    Phys Med Biol; 1987 Jan; 32(1):85-9. PubMed ID: 3823144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Inverse solutions based on MEG and EEG applied to volume conductor analysis.
    Stok CJ; Meijs JW; Peters MJ
    Phys Med Biol; 1987 Jan; 32(1):99-104. PubMed ID: 3823146
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. EEG and MEG: sensitivity to epileptic spike activity as function of source orientation and depth.
    Hunold A; Funke ME; Eichardt R; Stenroos M; Haueisen J
    Physiol Meas; 2016 Jul; 37(7):1146-62. PubMed ID: 27328313
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparison of performance of spherical and realistic head models in dipole localization from noisy EEG.
    Vanrumste B; Van Hoey G; Van de Walle R; D'Havé MR; Lemahieu IA; Boon PA
    Med Eng Phys; 2002 Jul; 24(6):403-18. PubMed ID: 12135649
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A technique to consider mismatches between fMRI and EEG/MEG sources for fMRI-constrained EEG/MEG source imaging: a preliminary simulation study.
    Im CH; Lee SY
    Phys Med Biol; 2006 Dec; 51(23):6005-21. PubMed ID: 17110766
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Error bounds for EEG and MEG dipole source localization.
    Mosher JC; Spencer ME; Leahy RM; Lewis PS
    Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol; 1993 May; 86(5):303-21. PubMed ID: 7685264
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. MEG versus EEG localization test using implanted sources in the human brain.
    Cohen D; Cuffin BN; Yunokuchi K; Maniewski R; Purcell C; Cosgrove GR; Ives J; Kennedy JG; Schomer DL
    Ann Neurol; 1990 Dec; 28(6):811-7. PubMed ID: 2285267
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Influence of anisotropic electrical conductivity in white matter tissue on the EEG/MEG forward and inverse solution. A high-resolution whole head simulation study.
    Güllmar D; Haueisen J; Reichenbach JR
    Neuroimage; 2010 May; 51(1):145-63. PubMed ID: 20156576
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Comparison of the magnetoencephalogram and electroencephalogram.
    Cuffin BN; Cohen D
    Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol; 1979 Aug; 47(2):132-46. PubMed ID: 95707
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. MEG and EEG dipole clusters from extended cortical sources.
    Fuchs M; Kastner J; Tech R; Wagner M; Gasca F
    Biomed Eng Lett; 2017 Aug; 7(3):185-191. PubMed ID: 30603165
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. The validation of the finite difference method and reciprocity for solving the inverse problem in EEG dipole source analysis.
    Vanrumste B; Van Hoey G; Van de Walle R; D'Havé MR; Lemahieu IA; Boon PA
    Brain Topogr; 2001; 14(2):83-92. PubMed ID: 11797813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Array response kernels for EEG and MEG in multilayer ellipsoidal geometry.
    Gutiérrez D; Nehorai A
    IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 2008 Mar; 55(3):1103-11. PubMed ID: 18334402
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Effect of skull resistivity on the spatial resolutions of EEG and MEG.
    Malmivuo JA; Suihko VE
    IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 2004 Jul; 51(7):1276-80. PubMed ID: 15248545
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.