MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398250560 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0304356

Opening the dialogue: A preliminary exploration of hair color, hair cleanliness, light, and motion effects on fNIRS signal quality

2024· article· en· W4398250560 on OpenAlexafffund
M. Glennie Holmes, Daniel Aalto, Jacqueline Cummine

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsMisericordia Community HospitalWomen and Children’s Health Research InstituteUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFinger tappingFunctional near-infrared spectroscopyGross motor skillScalpSIGNAL (programming language)AudiologyComputer sciencePsychologyNeuroscienceMedicineMotor skillCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) is a promising tool for studying brain activity, offering advantages such as portability and affordability. However, challenges in data collection persist due to factors like participant physiology, environmental light, and gross-motor movements, with limited literature on their impact on fNIRS signal quality. This study addresses four potentially influential factors-hair color, hair cleanliness, environmental light, and gross-motor movements-on fNIRS signal quality. Our aim is to raise awareness and offer insights for future fNIRS research. METHODS: Six participants (4 Females, 2 Males) took part in four different experiments investigating the effects of hair color, hair cleanliness, environmental light, and gross-motor movements on fNIRS signal quality. Participants in Experiment 1, categorized by hair color, completed a finger-tapping task in a between-subjects block design. Signal quality was compared between each hair color. Participants in Experiments 2 and 3 completed a finger-tapping task in a within-subjects block design, with signal quality being compared across hair cleanliness (i.e., five consecutive days without washing the hair) and environmental light (i.e., sunlight, artificial light, no light, etc.), respectively. Experiment 4 assessed three gross-motor movements (i.e., walking, turning and nodding the head) in a within-subjects block design. Motor movements were then compared to resting blocks. Signal quality was evaluated using Scalp Coupling Index (SCI) measurements. RESULTS: Lighter hair produced better signals than dark hair, while the impact of environmental light remains uncertain. Hair cleanliness showed no significant effects, but gross motor movements notably reduced signal quality. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that hair color, environmental light, and gross-motor movements affect fNIRS signal quality while hair cleanliness does not. Nevertheless, future studies with larger sample sizes are warranted to fully understand these effects. To advance future research, comprehensive documentation of participant demographics and lab conditions, along with signal quality analyses, is essential.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.311

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.261 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207