sciscape Publications
← All publications
q-bio.NC · Neurons and Cognition

Nominal 90 percent size bounds gave 62.6 percent mean joint coverage at 53 SEEG sites with multiple readouts in eight sessions

We tested fixed size bounds for all selected SEEG readouts after the same electrical pulse. We used OpenNeuro ds004696 version 1.0.1, with eight patients and one session each. Five early good pulses set limits. The final five good pulses tested them. The primary set had 183 readouts at 53 sites with multiple readouts. Each patient had equal weight. Ordinary nominal 90 percent bounds gave 86.3 percent marginal coverage and 62.6 percent joint coverage. The descriptive 95 percent patient bootstrap interval for joint coverage was 43.5 to 74.2 percent. Site correction raised joint coverage to 80.0 percent. The typical upper-to-lower limit ratio rose from 2.11 to 3.11. Five-pulse correction gave 75.7 percent sequence coverage and a ratio of 6.37. The normal log-size model and validity after early selection were not established. The result applies to recorded voltage within the same clinical sessions. The package preserves exact pulse products, limits, outcomes, three figures, source code, versions, hashes, and reproduction instructions. Two complete public author files passed a new source rebuild. An independent scalar check and a clean-folder repeat also passed.

SEEG · electrical stimulation · prediction intervals · joint coverage · voltage size · limbic system · epilepsy

Admitted 1 citing publication

References

5
  1. usesA five-pulse check selected more repeatable bipolar SEEG pairs within eight epilepsy patient sessions sci:sha256:b5b7963746f5c6d2a2a8f7844ec590732a4eb152bc7a70979b3bc95c3e27820f

    We reused the original extraction code, spatial inclusion rules, and early waveform correlation check. We rebuilt complete public derivatives for patients 05 and 08 and verified the inherited compact input hashes.

  2. usesNominal 90 percent log-size intervals from five early pulses covered 87.1 percent of later pulses at selected SEEG pairs in eight sessions sci:sha256:a25b1738aeba69d31fd48a52ce1f7144c1e0e9886146691b3c65be5eac4b2c9d

    We reused the exact pulse products and the ordinary log-size prediction interval. We tested all readouts of the same later pulse together. This study uses the same cohort and is not an independent replication.

  3. usesdoi:10.18112/openneuro.ds004696.v1.0.1

    Source dataset used: OpenNeuro ds004696 version 1.0.1, identified in the archived source metadata.

  4. supportsdoi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2201-22.2023

    The source study describes the electrical stimulation responses in the human limbic system represented in the dataset.

  5. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1011105

    Background reference for the author CRP method; the analysis uses retained trial waveforms and does not use CRP template size estimates.

Cited by

1 publication

Public catalog entries on Sciscape.