Pre-intervention test-retest reliability of EEG and ERP over four recording intervals

Cheng-Teng Ip; Melanie Ganz; Brice Ozenne; Lasse B. Sluth; Mikkel Gram; Geoffrey Viardot; Philippe l'Hostis; Philippe Danjou; Gitte M. Knudsen; Søren R. Christensen

doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2018.09.007

Pre-intervention test-retest reliability of EEG and ERP over four recording intervals

Cheng-Teng Ip, Melanie Ganz, Brice Ozenne, Lasse B. Sluth, Mikkel Gram, Geoffrey Viardot, Philippe l'Hostis, Philippe Danjou, Gitte M. Knudsen, Søren R. Christensen^*

^*Corresponding author for this work

10 Citations (Scopus)

84 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

In this study we present the test-retest reliability of pre-intervention EEG/ERP (electroencephalogram/event-related potentials) data across four recording intervals separated by a washout period (18–22 days). POz-recording-reference EEG/ERP (28 sites, average reference) were recorded from thirty-two healthy male participants. Participants were randomly allocated into different intervention sequences, each with four intervention regimens: 10 mg vortioxetine, 20 mg vortioxetine, 15 mg escitalopram and Placebo. We report classical EEG spectra: δ (1–4 Hz), θ (4–8 Hz), α (8–12 Hz), β (12–30 Hz), γ1 (30–45 Hz) and γ2 (45–80 Hz) of resting state and vigilance-controlled, and of auditory steady state response, as well as ERP components N100, P200 and P300 in auditory oddball task and error related negativity (ERN) and error positivity (Pe) in hybrid flanker task. Reliability was quantified using intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). We found that θ α and β of continuous EEG were highly reliable (ICCs ≥ 0.84). Evoked power of other tasks demonstrated larger variability and less reliability compared to the absolute power of continuous EEG. Furthermore, reliabilities of ERP measures were lower compared to those of the EEG spectra. We saw fair to excellent reliability of the amplitude of the components such as Pe (0.60–0.82) and P300 (0.55–0.80). Moreover, blood tests confirmed that there was no measurable drug carry-over from the previous intervention. The results support that EEG/ERP is reliable across four recording intervals, thus it can be used to assess the effect of different doses and types of drugs with CNS effects.

Original language	English
Journal	International Journal of Psychophysiology
Volume	134
Pages (from-to)	30-43
ISSN	0167-8760
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2018.09.007
Publication status	Published - 1 Dec 2018

Keywords

Crossover design
EEG
ERP
Repeated measurements
Test-retest reliability

Access to Document

10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2018.09.007Licence: CC BY

Pre-intervention test-retest reliability of EEG and ERP over four recording intervalsFinal published version, 5.03 MBLicence: CC BY

Cite this

@article{10cf355149a54b94803127efb7b4d2d0,

title = "Pre-intervention test-retest reliability of EEG and ERP over four recording intervals",

abstract = "In this study we present the test-retest reliability of pre-intervention EEG/ERP (electroencephalogram/event-related potentials) data across four recording intervals separated by a washout period (18–22 days). POz-recording-reference EEG/ERP (28 sites, average reference) were recorded from thirty-two healthy male participants. Participants were randomly allocated into different intervention sequences, each with four intervention regimens: 10 mg vortioxetine, 20 mg vortioxetine, 15 mg escitalopram and Placebo. We report classical EEG spectra: δ (1–4 Hz), θ (4–8 Hz), α (8–12 Hz), β (12–30 Hz), γ1 (30–45 Hz) and γ2 (45–80 Hz) of resting state and vigilance-controlled, and of auditory steady state response, as well as ERP components N100, P200 and P300 in auditory oddball task and error related negativity (ERN) and error positivity (Pe) in hybrid flanker task. Reliability was quantified using intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). We found that θ α and β of continuous EEG were highly reliable (ICCs ≥ 0.84). Evoked power of other tasks demonstrated larger variability and less reliability compared to the absolute power of continuous EEG. Furthermore, reliabilities of ERP measures were lower compared to those of the EEG spectra. We saw fair to excellent reliability of the amplitude of the components such as Pe (0.60–0.82) and P300 (0.55–0.80). Moreover, blood tests confirmed that there was no measurable drug carry-over from the previous intervention. The results support that EEG/ERP is reliable across four recording intervals, thus it can be used to assess the effect of different doses and types of drugs with CNS effects.",

keywords = "Crossover design, EEG, ERP, Repeated measurements, Test-retest reliability",

author = "Cheng-Teng Ip and Melanie Ganz and Brice Ozenne and Sluth, {Lasse B.} and Mikkel Gram and Geoffrey Viardot and Philippe l'Hostis and Philippe Danjou and Knudsen, {Gitte M.} and Christensen, {S{\o}ren R.}",

year = "2018",

month = dec,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2018.09.007",

language = "English",

volume = "134",

pages = "30--43",

journal = "International Journal of Psychophysiology",

issn = "0167-8760",

publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Pre-intervention test-retest reliability of EEG and ERP over four recording intervals

AU - Ip, Cheng-Teng

AU - Ganz, Melanie

AU - Ozenne, Brice

AU - Sluth, Lasse B.

AU - Gram, Mikkel

AU - Viardot, Geoffrey

AU - l'Hostis, Philippe

AU - Danjou, Philippe

AU - Knudsen, Gitte M.

AU - Christensen, Søren R.

PY - 2018/12/1

Y1 - 2018/12/1

N2 - In this study we present the test-retest reliability of pre-intervention EEG/ERP (electroencephalogram/event-related potentials) data across four recording intervals separated by a washout period (18–22 days). POz-recording-reference EEG/ERP (28 sites, average reference) were recorded from thirty-two healthy male participants. Participants were randomly allocated into different intervention sequences, each with four intervention regimens: 10 mg vortioxetine, 20 mg vortioxetine, 15 mg escitalopram and Placebo. We report classical EEG spectra: δ (1–4 Hz), θ (4–8 Hz), α (8–12 Hz), β (12–30 Hz), γ1 (30–45 Hz) and γ2 (45–80 Hz) of resting state and vigilance-controlled, and of auditory steady state response, as well as ERP components N100, P200 and P300 in auditory oddball task and error related negativity (ERN) and error positivity (Pe) in hybrid flanker task. Reliability was quantified using intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). We found that θ α and β of continuous EEG were highly reliable (ICCs ≥ 0.84). Evoked power of other tasks demonstrated larger variability and less reliability compared to the absolute power of continuous EEG. Furthermore, reliabilities of ERP measures were lower compared to those of the EEG spectra. We saw fair to excellent reliability of the amplitude of the components such as Pe (0.60–0.82) and P300 (0.55–0.80). Moreover, blood tests confirmed that there was no measurable drug carry-over from the previous intervention. The results support that EEG/ERP is reliable across four recording intervals, thus it can be used to assess the effect of different doses and types of drugs with CNS effects.

AB - In this study we present the test-retest reliability of pre-intervention EEG/ERP (electroencephalogram/event-related potentials) data across four recording intervals separated by a washout period (18–22 days). POz-recording-reference EEG/ERP (28 sites, average reference) were recorded from thirty-two healthy male participants. Participants were randomly allocated into different intervention sequences, each with four intervention regimens: 10 mg vortioxetine, 20 mg vortioxetine, 15 mg escitalopram and Placebo. We report classical EEG spectra: δ (1–4 Hz), θ (4–8 Hz), α (8–12 Hz), β (12–30 Hz), γ1 (30–45 Hz) and γ2 (45–80 Hz) of resting state and vigilance-controlled, and of auditory steady state response, as well as ERP components N100, P200 and P300 in auditory oddball task and error related negativity (ERN) and error positivity (Pe) in hybrid flanker task. Reliability was quantified using intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). We found that θ α and β of continuous EEG were highly reliable (ICCs ≥ 0.84). Evoked power of other tasks demonstrated larger variability and less reliability compared to the absolute power of continuous EEG. Furthermore, reliabilities of ERP measures were lower compared to those of the EEG spectra. We saw fair to excellent reliability of the amplitude of the components such as Pe (0.60–0.82) and P300 (0.55–0.80). Moreover, blood tests confirmed that there was no measurable drug carry-over from the previous intervention. The results support that EEG/ERP is reliable across four recording intervals, thus it can be used to assess the effect of different doses and types of drugs with CNS effects.

KW - Crossover design

KW - EEG

KW - ERP

KW - Repeated measurements

KW - Test-retest reliability

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85055038708&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2018.09.007

DO - 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2018.09.007

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 30253197

AN - SCOPUS:85055038708

SN - 0167-8760

VL - 134

SP - 30

EP - 43

JO - International Journal of Psychophysiology

JF - International Journal of Psychophysiology

ER -

Pre-intervention test-retest reliability of EEG and ERP over four recording intervals

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this