Effect of channel density, inverse solutions and connectivity measures on EEG resting-state networks reconstruction: A simulation study

Abstract

Along with the study of brain activity evoked by external stimuli, the past two decades witnessed an increased interest in characterizing the spontaneous brain activity occurring during resting conditions. The identification of connectivity patterns in this so-called "resting-state" has been the subject of a great number of electrophysiology-based studies, using the Electro/Magneto-Encephalography (EEG/MEG) source connectivity method. However, no consensus has been reached yet regarding a unified (if possible) analysis pipeline, and several involved parameters and methods require cautious tuning. This is particularly challenging when different analytical choices induce significant discrepancies in results and drawn conclusions, thereby hindering the reproducibility of neuroimaging research. Hence, our objective in this study was to shed light on the effect of analytical variability on outcome consistency by evaluating the implications of parameters involved in the EEG source connectivity analysis on the accuracy of resting-state networks (RSNs) reconstruction. We simulated, using neural mass models, EEG data corresponding to two RSNs, namely the default mode network (DMN) and dorsal attentional network (DAN). We investigated the impact of five channel densities (19, 32, 64, 128, 256), three inverse solutions (weighted minimum norm estimate (wMNE), exact low-resolution brain electromagnetic tomography (eLORETA), and linearly constrained minimum variance (LCMV) beamforming) and four functional connectivity measures (phase-locking value (PLV), phase-lag index (PLI), and amplitude envelope correlation (AEC) with and without source leakage correction), on the correspondence between reconstructed and reference networks. We showed that, with different analytical choices related to the number of electrodes, source reconstruction algorithm, and functional connectivity measure, high variability is present in the results. More specifically, our results show that a higher number of EEG channels significantly increased the accuracy of the reconstructed networks. Additionally, our results showed significant variability in the performance of the tested inverse solutions and connectivity measures. Such methodological variability and absence of analysis standardization represent a critical issue for neuroimaging studies that should be prioritized. We believe that this work could be useful for the field of electrophysiology connectomics, by increasing awareness regarding the challenge of variability in methodological approaches and its implications on reported results.