Multi-site EEG studies in early infancy: Methods to enhance data quality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Brain differences linked to autism spectrum disorder (ASD) can manifest before observable symptoms. Studying these early neural precursors in larger and more diverse cohorts is crucial for advancing our understanding of developmental pathways and potentially facilitating earlier identification. EEG is an ideal tool for investigating early neural differences in ASD, given its scalability and high tolerability in infant populations. In this context, we integrated EEG into an existing multi-site MRI study of infants with a higher familial likelihood of developing ASD. This paper describes the comprehensive protocol established to collect longitudinal, high-density EEG data from infants across five sites as part of the Infant Brain Imaging Study (IBIS) Network and reports interim feasibility and data quality results. We evaluated feasibility by measuring the percentage of infants from whom we successfully collected each EEG paradigm. The quality of task-free data was assessed based on the duration of EEG recordings remaining after artifact removal. Preliminary analyses revealed low data loss, with average in-session loss rates at 4.16 % and quality control loss rates at 11.66 %. Overall, the task-free data retention rate, accounting for both in-session issues and quality control, was 84.16 %, with high consistency across sites. The insights gained from this preliminary analysis highlight key sources of data attrition and provide practical considerations to guide similar research endeavors.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.092 | 0.172 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".