Nick Price’s research while affiliated with Electrical Geodesics Incorporated and other places

What is this page?


This page lists works of an author who doesn't have a ResearchGate profile or hasn't added the works to their profile yet. It is automatically generated from public (personal) data to further our legitimate goal of comprehensive and accurate scientific recordkeeping. If you are this author and want this page removed, please let us know.

Publications (8)


Fig. 4: Box plots of the estimates using real data for the scalp (a) and skull (b) conductivity values using the 5 different models and for the four subjects. Each red cross represents the estimate for one current injection pair, circle indicates the median (which is also given in numbers), blue asterisk represents the mean, and edges of the blue box are the 25th and 75th percentiles. The first box plot in each graph of (b) corresponds to the compact bone conductivity of the 3parameter search while the other values correspond to conductivity estimates of the skull as a whole. It is clearly seen that the mean skull conductivity estimates are larger when the model is simpler, but the scalp conductivity estimates remain almost unaltered.
Fig. 5: Box plots of the estimates using synthetic data for the scalp (a) and skull (b) conductivity values using the 5 different models and for the four subjects. Each red cross represents the estimate for one current injection pair, circle indicates the median (which is also given in numbers), blue asterisk represents the mean, and edges of the blue box are the 25th and 75th percentiles. The first box plot in each graph of (b) corresponds to the compact bone conductivity of the 3parameter search while the other values correspond to conductivity estimates of the skull as a whole. As in this figure we show the estimates obtained from the synthetic signals, this first box in each graph acts as a validation of the estimation method. It is clearly seen that the skull conductivity estimates are larger when the model is simpler, but the scalp conductivity estimates remain almost unaltered, as when using real data. 
Fig 6: skull conductivity estimates for the 2-parameter search and compact bone conductivity estimates for the 3-parameter search versus the frequency. These results are based on real data for subject AM. The two adjusted Akhtari models are also shown. 
Skull Modeling Effects in Conductivity Estimates Using Parametric Electrical Impedance Tomography
  • Article
  • Full-text available

November 2017

·

830 Reads

·

49 Citations

IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering

·

·

·

[...]

·

Objective: To estimate the scalp, skull, compact bone and marrow bone electrical conductivity values based on Electrical Impedance Tomography (EIT) measurements, and to determine the influence of the skull modeling details on the estimates. Methods: We collected EIT data with 62 current injection pairs and built five 6-8 million finite element (FE) head models with different grades of skull simplifications for four subjects, including three whose head models serve as Atlas in the scientific literature and in commercial equipment (Colin27 and EGI's Geosource atlases). We estimated the electrical conductivity of the scalp, skull, marrow bone and compact bone tissues for each current injection pair, each model, and each subject. Results: patching the skull holes in FE models, using four-layer Boundary Element Method-like models, and neglecting the CSF layer produce an overestimation of the skull conductivity of 10%, 10-20%, and 20-30% respectively (accumulated overestimation of 50-70%). The average extracted conductivities are: 28853 (the scalp), 4.30.08 (the compact bone), and 5.51.25 (the whole skull) mS/m. The marrow bone estimates showed large dispersion. Conclusion: our EIT estimates for the skull conductivity are lower than typical literature reference values, but the previous in-vivo EIT results are likely overestimated due to the use of simpler models. Significance: the typical literature values of 7-10mS/m for the skull conductivity should be replaced by our new estimates when using detailed skull head models. We also provide subject specific conductivity estimates for widely used Atlas head models.

Download







Citations (2)


... This suggests that individualized conductivity values are more critical for accurate dosage control than targeting or optimization, as in our study. In addition, age-related calcification changes can lead to a significant conductivity shift in the skull [49] that may impact the electric field intensity and, to a lesser extent, the spatial distribution [50]. Furthermore, the head model did not account for the anisotropic conductivity of brain tissues, especially in white matter, which might lead to more pronounced hotspots in deep brain regions [51]. ...

Reference:

Population-optimized electrode montage approximates individualized optimization in transcranial temporal interference stimulation
Skull Modeling Effects in Conductivity Estimates Using Parametric Electrical Impedance Tomography

IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering

... The following simplification of the inverse problem is known as bounded EIT (bEIT). bEIT has been mainly used in biophysics research regarding the human brain, specifically to study the brain-to-skull conductivity ratio (Oostendorp et al. 2000, Gonçalves et al. 2003, Clerc et al. 2005, Lai et al. 2005, Zhang et al. 2006, Fernández-Corazza et al. 2013, Ouypornkochagorn et al. 2014, Dabek et al. 2015, Fernández-Corazza et al. 2016, Essaki Arumugam et al. 2017. These studies rely roughly on the same approach: the conductivities, of the tissues of interest, are solved by varying the conductivities in the models, so that the difference between the measurements and the model estimates are minimized. ...

In vivo estimation of scalp and skull conductivity using bEIT for non-invasive neuroimaging and stimulation.