↓ Skip to main content

Data mining EEG signals in depression for their diagnostic value

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
80 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Data mining EEG signals in depression for their diagnostic value
Published in
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12911-015-0227-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mahdi Mohammadi, Fadwa Al-Azab, Bijan Raahemi, Gregory Richards, Natalia Jaworska, Dylan Smith, Sara de la Salle, Pierre Blier, Verner Knott

Abstract

Quantitative electroencephalogram (EEG) is one neuroimaging technique that has been shown to differentiate patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) and non-depressed healthy volunteers (HV) at the group-level, but its diagnostic potential for detecting differences at the individual level has yet to be realized. Quantitative EEGs produce complex data sets derived from digitally analyzed electrical activity at different frequency bands, at multiple electrode locations, and under different vigilance (eyes open vs. closed) states, resulting in potential feature patterns which may be diagnostically useful, but detectable only with advanced mathematical models. This paper uses a data mining methodology for classifying EEGs of 53 MDD patients and 43 HVs. This included: (a) pre-processing the data, including cleaning and normalization, applying Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA) to map the features into a new feature space; and applying Genetic Algorithm (GA) to identify the most significant features; (b) building predictive models using the Decision Tree (DT) algorithm to discover rules and hidden patterns based on the reduced and mapped features; and (c) evaluating the models based on the accuracy and false positive values on the EEG data of MDD and HV participants. Two categories of experiments were performed. The first experiment analyzed each frequency band individually, while the second experiment analyzed the bands together. Application of LDA and GA markedly reduced the total number of utilized features by ≥ 50 % and, with all frequency bands analyzed together, the model showed average classification accuracy (MDD vs. HV) of 80 %. The best results from model testing with additional test EEG recordings from 9 MDD patients and 35 HV individuals demonstrated an accuracy of 80 % and showed an average sensitivity of 70 %, a specificity of 76 %, and a positive (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of 74 and 75 %, respectively. These initial findings suggest that the proposed automated EEG analytical approach could be a useful adjunctive diagnostic approach in clinical practice.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 74 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 14%
Student > Bachelor 10 14%
Student > Master 8 11%
Researcher 4 5%
Student > Postgraduate 3 4%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 32 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 10 14%
Engineering 10 14%
Computer Science 5 7%
Unspecified 3 4%
Psychology 3 4%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 35 47%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 May 2017.
All research outputs
#6,079,025
of 22,836,570 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#543
of 1,990 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96,000
of 390,592 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#11
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,836,570 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,990 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 390,592 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.