please find attached information about a paper just published in Neuroimage.
The paper aims to discuss 'Good practice for conducting and reporting MEG research.'
You can find full text and PDF here:
We would very much appreciate feedback from the community about the content of the paper.
You can send suggestions, thoughts, feedback to a discussion forum at megcommunity.org
All contributions are welcome and we hope that a lively discussion will help improve quality and impact of MEG research in our community.
Prof. Joachim Gross
Acting Director, Centre for Cognitive Neuroimaging (CCNi)
Institute of Neuroscience and Psychology
College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences
University of Glasgow
58 Hillhead Street
Good practice for conducting and reporting MEG research.
Gross J, Baillet S, Barnes GR, Henson RN, Hillebrand A, Jensen O, Jerbi K, Litvak V, Maess B, Oostenveld R, Parkkonen L, Taylor JR, van Wassenhove V, Wibral M, Schoffelen JM.
Neuroimage. 2012 Oct 6.
Magnetoencephalographic (MEG) recordings are a rich source of information about the neural dynamics underlying cognitive processes in the brain, with excellent temporal and good spatial resolution. In recent years there have been considerable advances in MEG hardware developments and methods. Sophisticated analysis techniques are now routinely applied and continuously improved, leading to fascinating insights into the intricate dynamics of neural processes. However, the rapidly increasing level of complexity of the different steps in a MEG study make it difficult for novices, and sometimes even for experts, to stay aware of possible limitations and caveats. Furthermore, the complexity of MEG data acquisition and data analysis requires special attention when describing MEG studies in publications, in order to facilitate interpretation and reproduction of the results. This manuscript aims at making recommendations for a number of important data acquisition and data analysis steps and suggests details that should be specified in manuscripts reporting MEG studies. These recommendations will hopefully serve as guidelines that help to strengthen the position of the MEG research community within the field of neuroscience, and may foster discussion in order to further enhance the quality and impact of MEG research.