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 *

181 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9741752)

  • 1. Volume conduction effects in EEG and MEG.
    van den Broek SP; Reinders F; Donderwinkel M; Peters MJ
    Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol; 1998 Jun; 106(6):522-34. PubMed ID: 9741752
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Influence of tissue conductivity anisotropy on EEG/MEG field and return current computation in a realistic head model: a simulation and visualization study using high-resolution finite element modeling.
    Wolters CH; Anwander A; Tricoche X; Weinstein D; Koch MA; MacLeod RS
    Neuroimage; 2006 Apr; 30(3):813-26. PubMed ID: 16364662
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The influence of brain tissue anisotropy on human EEG and MEG.
    Haueisen J; Tuch DS; Ramon C; Schimpf PH; Wedeen VJ; George JS; Belliveau JW
    Neuroimage; 2002 Jan; 15(1):159-66. PubMed ID: 11771984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Combining EEG and MEG for the reconstruction of epileptic activity using a calibrated realistic volume conductor model.
    Aydin Ü; Vorwerk J; Küpper P; Heers M; Kugel H; Galka A; Hamid L; Wellmer J; Kellinghaus C; Rampp S; Wolters CH
    PLoS One; 2014; 9(3):e93154. PubMed ID: 24671208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Effects of local skull inhomogeneities on EEG source estimation.
    Ollikainen JO; Vauhkonen M; Karjalainen PA; Kaipio JP
    Med Eng Phys; 1999 Apr; 21(3):143-54. PubMed ID: 10468356
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Sensitivity distributions of EEG and MEG measurements.
    Malmivuo J; Suihko V; Eskola H
    IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 1997 Mar; 44(3):196-208. PubMed ID: 9216133
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Evaluation of the distortion of EEG signals caused by a hole in the skull mimicking the fontanel in the skull of human neonates.
    Flemming L; Wang Y; Caprihan A; Eiselt M; Haueisen J; Okada Y
    Clin Neurophysiol; 2005 May; 116(5):1141-52. PubMed ID: 15826855
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Independent component analysis of short-time Fourier transforms for spontaneous EEG/MEG analysis.
    Hyvärinen A; Ramkumar P; Parkkonen L; Hari R
    Neuroimage; 2010 Jan; 49(1):257-71. PubMed ID: 19699307
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Effects of sutures and fontanels on MEG and EEG source analysis in a realistic infant head model.
    Lew S; Sliva DD; Choe MS; Grant PE; Okada Y; Wolters CH; Hämäläinen MS
    Neuroimage; 2013 Aug; 76():282-93. PubMed ID: 23531680
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Spatio-temporal current density reconstruction (stCDR) from EEG/MEG-data.
    Darvas F; Schmitt U; Louis AK; Fuchs M; Knoll G; Buchner H
    Brain Topogr; 2001; 13(3):195-207. PubMed ID: 11302398
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Accounting for linear transformations of EEG and MEG data in source analysis.
    Hipp JF; Siegel M
    PLoS One; 2015; 10(4):e0121048. PubMed ID: 25836951
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Dipole location errors in electroencephalogram source analysis due to volume conductor model errors.
    Vanrumste B; Van Hoey G; Van de Walle R; D'Havé M; Lemahieu I; Boon P
    Med Biol Eng Comput; 2000 Sep; 38(5):528-34. PubMed ID: 11094809
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.