EEG Data Quality: Determinants and Impact in a Multicenter Study of Children, Adolescents, and Adults with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)

Abstract

Electroencephalography (EEG) represents a widely established method for assessing altered and typically developing brain function. However, systematic studies on EEG data quality, its correlates, and consequences are scarce. To address this research gap, the current study focused on the percentage of artifact-free segments after standard EEG pre-processing as a data quality index. We analyzed participant-related and methodological influences, and validity by replicating landmark EEG effects. Further, effects of data quality on spectral power analyses beyond participant-related characteristics were explored. EEG data from a multicenter ADHD-cohort (age range 6 to 45 years), and a non-ADHD school-age control group were analyzed (ntotal = 305). Resting-state data during eyes open, and eyes closed conditions, and task-related data during a cued Continuous Performance Task (CPT) were collected. After pre-processing, general linear models, and stepwise regression models were fitted to the data. We found that EEG data quality was strongly related to demographic characteristics, but not to methodological factors. We were able to replicate maturational, task, and ADHD effects reported in the EEG literature, establishing a link with EEG-landmark effects. Furthermore, we showed that poor data quality significantly increases spectral power beyond effects of maturation and symptom severity. Taken together, the current results indicate that with a careful design and systematic quality control, informative large-scale multicenter trials characterizing neurophysiological mechanisms in neurodevelopmental disorders across the lifespan are feasible. Nevertheless, results are restricted to the limitations reported. Future work will clarify predictive value.

Identifying HRV and EEG correlates of well-being using ultra-short, portable, and low-cost measurements

“…With 5% of channels and 19% of the signal removed on average per participant, EEG signal quality was also estimated to be satisfactory according to our quality criteria (see Methods). While the percentage of artifacts or artifact-free data is often considered a signal quality index, future studies could develop a standardized, universal signal quality index for low-density wearable EEG (e.g., (Gabard-Durnam et al, 2018; Kaiser et al, 2021; Lucey et al, 2016; Mahdidet al, 2020).…”