MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4407758291 · doi:10.1101/2025.02.14.25322283

Characterizing resting-state EEG oscillatory and aperiodic activity in neurodegenerative diseases: A multicentric study

2025· preprint· en· W4407758291 on OpenAlexaff
Alberto Jaramillo-Jiménez, Yorguin-José Mantilla-Ramos, Diego Tovar, Francisco Lopera, David Aguillón, John Fredy Ochoa-Gómez, Claire Paquet, Sinead Gaubert, Matteo Pardini, Dario Arnaldi, John‐Paul Taylor, Tormod Fladby, Kolbjørn Brønnick, Dag Aarsland, Laura Bonanni

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersCenter for Innovative MedicineUniversity of California, San DiegoNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchUniversidad de AntioquiaKing's College LondonNIHR Newcastle Biomedical Research CentreHelse VestWellcome Trust
KeywordsAperiodic graphElectroencephalographyResting state fMRINeurosciencePsychologyMedicineAudiologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Abnormalities in resting-state electroencephalogram (rsEEG) posterior alpha rhythm are promising biomarkers of neurodegenerative diseases (NDDs), often assessed via spectral analysis, ignoring the signal’s non-rhythmic (aperiodic) component. Evidence assessing aperiodic and oscillatory rsEEG abnormalities across NDDs is scarce and often underpowered. Multicenter studies could tackle these limitations, but data pooling might introduce site-related rsEEG differences (batch effects). This study aims to characterize rsEEG oscillatory and aperiodic patterns across NDDs, minimizing potential batch effects. Methods RsEEGs (n = 639; 11 sites) were automatically preprocessed. Signals comprised healthy controls (HC = 153), Lewy Body Dementias (LBD = 95), Parkinson’s Disease (PD = 71), Alzheimer’s Disease (AD = 186), Frontotemporal Dementia (FTD = 23), Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) in positive Lewy Body pathology or PD (MCI-LBD = 34), and MCI in positive AD pathology (MCI-AD = 77). Power spectrum batch effects were harmonized using reComBat (age, sex, and diagnosis-adjusted). Harmonization was evaluated with functional and mass-univariate ANOVAs. Oscillatory and aperiodic parameters were extracted from the batch-harmonized power spectrum. NDDs-related differences were estimated with functional and mass-univariate tests, bootstrapped pairwise comparisons, and logistic regressions. Results Qualitative visualizations and statistical testing showed reduced batch effects after harmonization. Statistically significant findings included steeper aperiodic parameters and lower oscillatory center frequency in LBD compared to other NDDs. Additionally, oscillatory extended alpha power was lower in AD vs. LBD. Conclusions Batch effects in the rsEEG power spectrum can be mitigated with harmonization. Oscillatory alpha power reduction may better reflect AD abnormalities, whereas pronounced oscillatory frequency slowing and greater aperiodic activity characterize LBD.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicNeural dynamics and brain function→French-language works237,207→