Michelle Dawson posts
Structured cited links
Joachim Gross, Sylvain Baillet, Gareth R. Barnes, Richard N. Henson, Arjan Hillebrand, Ole Jensen, Karim Jerbi, Vladimir Litvak, et al. (2013). Good practice for conducting and reporting MEG research. NeuroImage, 65, 349-363. Elsevier BV.
Abstract
Magnetoencephalographic (MEG) recordings are a rich source of information about the neural dynamics underlying cognitive processes in the brain, with excellent temporal and good spatial resolution. In recent years there have been considerable advances in MEG hardware developments and methods. Sophisticated analysis techniques are now routinely applied and continuously improved, leading to fascinating insights into the intricate dynamics of neural processes. However, the rapidly increasing level of complexity of the different steps in a MEG study make it difficult for novices, and sometimes even for experts, to stay aware of possible limitations and caveats. Furthermore, the complexity of MEG data acquisition and data analysis requires special attention when describing MEG studies in publications, in order to facilitate interpretation and reproduction of the results. This manuscript aims at making recommendations for a number of important data acquisition and data analysis steps and suggests details that should be specified in manuscripts reporting MEG studies. These recommendations will hopefully serve as guidelines that help to strengthen the position of the MEG research community within the field of neuroscience, and may foster discussion in order to further enhance the quality and impact of MEG research.
Study authors in this cited reference