Back

Test-retest reliability of auditory MMN measured with OPM-MEG

Demko, L.; Iglesias, S.; Mellor, S.; Bassi, C.; Brand, K.; Kalberer, A.; Koechli, L.; Marino, S.; Zimmermann, N. D.; Heinzle, J.; Stephan, K. E.

2024-12-15 neuroscience
10.1101/2024.12.10.627674 bioRxiv
Show abstract

In this paper, we report results from an investigation of auditory mismatch responses as measured by magnetoencephalography (MEG) based on optically pumped magnetometers (OPM). Specifically, as part of a quality control study, we examined the reliability and validity of auditory mismatch negativity (MMN) recordings, obtained with a newly installed OPM-MEG system. Based on OPM-MEG data from 30 healthy volunteers, measured twice with an established auditory MMN paradigm with frequency deviants, we examined the following questions: First, we focused on construct validity and examined whether OPM-MEG measurements of MMN responses (in terms of event-related fields, ERFs) were qualitatively comparable to previous MMN findings from studies using EEG or MEG based on superconducting quantum interference devices (SQUIDs). In particular, we examined whether significant MMN responses measured by OPM-MEG occurred in a comparable time window and showed a similar topography as in previous EEG/MEG studies of MMN. Second, we quantified test-retest reliability of MMN amplitude and latency over two separate measurement sessions. The results of our analyses show that MMN responses recorded with OPM-MEG are in good agreement with previously reported MMN results in terms of timing and topography. Furthermore, the comparison of group-level MMN topographies and timeseries shows excellent consistency across the two measurement sessions. Our quantitative test-retest reliability analyses at the sensor level indicate good reliability for MMN amplitude, but poor reliability for MMN latency. Overall, our findings suggest that OPM-MEG measurements of auditory MMN (i) are comparable to results from EEG and SQUID-based MEG and (ii) show good test-retest reliability for amplitude measures at the sensor level. Notably, these results were achieved in an "out of the box" state of the OPM-MEG system, shortly after installation and without further optimisation. The reason for the insufficient reliability for MMN latency we observed is currently under investigation and represents an important target for future improvements.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.