A direct comparison of active and passive amplification electrodes in the same amplifier system

Journal of Neuroscience Methods

Volumn 235, Issue , 2014, Pages 298-307

  Laszlo, Sarah ^a   Ruiz Blondet, Maria ^a   Khalifian, Negin ^a   Chu, Fanny ^b   Jin, Zhanpeng ^a,c  

^a BINGHAMTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c State University of New York at Binghamton   (United States)

Author keywords

Active amplification; Electrophysiological methods; Interelectrode impedance

Indexed keywords

ACTIVE AMPLIFICATION ELECTRODE; ADULT; AMPLIFIER; ARTICLE; ELECTRIC POTENTIAL; ELECTRODE; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAM; ELECTROOCULOGRAM; EYE MOVEMENT; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; IMPEDANCE; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; PASSIVE AMPLIFICATION ELECTRODE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECORDING; SKIN CONDUCTANCE; STIMULUS; WAVEFORM; BRAIN; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DEVICES; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; ELECTROOCULOGRAPHY; EVOKED VISUAL RESPONSE; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; REPRODUCIBILITY; VISION; YOUNG ADULT;

ADULT; AMPLIFIERS, ELECTRONIC; BRAIN; ELECTRIC IMPEDANCE; ELECTRODES; ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAPHY; ELECTROOCULOGRAPHY; EVOKED POTENTIALS, VISUAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PHOTIC STIMULATION; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; VISUAL PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84907339124     PISSN: 01650270     EISSN: 1872678X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2014.05.012     Document Type: Article

References (11)

1. Aurlien H., Gjerde I.O., Aarseth J.H., Eldøen G., Karlsen B., Skeidsvoll H., et al. EEG background activity described by a large computerized database. Clin Neurophysiol 2004, 115(3):665-673.
2. BioSemi Co. Is skin preparation necessary when using BioSemi active electrodes? In BioSemi Frequently Asked Questions; n.d. Retrieved April 15, 2013 from. http://www.biosemi.com/faq/skin_preparation.htm.
3. Brain Products GmbH. BCI-biofeedback: brain computer interface and brain machine interface. [brochure]. Munich, Germany; 2009.
4. Delorme A., Makeig S. EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics. J Neurosci Methods 2004, 134:9-21.
5. Kappenman E.S., Luck S.J. The effects of electrode impedance on data quality and statistical significance in ERP recordings. Psychophysiology 2010, 47:888-904.
6. Keil A., Debener S., Gratton G., Junghöfer M., Kappenman E.S., Luck S.J., et al. Committee report: publication guidelines and recommendations for studies using electroencephalography and magnetoencephalography. Psychophysiology 2014, 51:1-21.
7. Metting Van Rijn A.C., Peper A., Grimbergen C.A. High-quality recording of bioelectric events I: interference reduction, theory, and practice. Med Biol Eng Comput 1990, 28:389-397.
8. Metting Van Rijn A.C., Kuiper A.P., Dankers T.E., Grimbergen C.A. Low-cost active electrode improves the resolution in biopotential recordings. Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Bridging Disciplines for Biomedicine Proceedings of the 18th Annual International Conference of the IEEE, October 1996, vol. 1:101-102. IEEE.
9. Nonclercq A., Mathys P. Quantification of motion artifact rejection due to active electrodes and driven-right-leg circuit in spike detection algorithms. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2010, 57(11):2746-2752.
10. Picton T.W., Hillyard S.A. Cephalic skin potentials in electroencephalography. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1972, 33:419-424.
11. Putnam L.E., Johnson R., Roth W.T. Guidelines for reducing the risk of disease transmission in the psychophysiology laboratory. Psychophysiology 1992, 29(2):127-141.