Sign in
NeuroscienceNeurophotonics
Peer-reviewed journal article

Investigating the effect of channel pruning on functional near-infrared spectroscopy data collected from children aged 5-24 months

Samuel BeatoniD, Borja BlancoiD, Chiara BulgarelliiD, Clare E. ElwelliD, Sarah Lloyd‐FoxiD, Ebrima Mbye, Samantha McCanniD, Anna BlasiiD, Sophie E. MooreiD

Abstract

SignificanceInfant functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) data are particularly vulnerable to noise; participant behaviour can result in motion artefacts and reduced set-up times can cause poor optode coupling. Accurate channel pruning is therefore essential but approaches vary and often use adult-derived thresholds, risking unnecessary data loss. AimThis work systematically compared pruning approaches and parameter choices to evaluate their effects on data quality and retention in infant fNIRS. ApproachData from 5-24 month-old infants were collected across two cohorts, using two paradigms. Channel pruning was performed using the coefficient of variation (CV) and the Quality Testing of Near Infrared Scans (QT-NIRS) tool, varying key thresholds. Multilevel models assessed effects of pruning method, parameter choice, age, motion, and testing site on signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and channels retained. ResultsQT-NIRS produced significantly higher SNR than CV pruning across nearly all age, task, and cohort combinations, when matched for data retention. Higher QT-NIRS thresholds improved quality but reduced retention. Motion prevalence strongly reduced both SNR and retention; testing site and age had smaller but notable effects. ConclusionsQT-NIRS offers a better balance of data quality and retention than CV pruning. Lower QT-NIRS thresholds than adult defaults are recommended for infant data. These findings provide practical guidance for preprocessing pipelines in developmental fNIRS research.

PDFDOI

02 /Specification & Classification

Click any tag to browse matching papers
Citations
2
FWCI
9.55
Field percentile
top 3%

Reproducibility ledger

Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.

Sign in to file a reproducibility report.

Similarity Map
SelectedSame fieldCross-field
THISPinti '24Kelly '26Ivanova '26Baek '23Tremblay '22Hüsser '22
72% semantic matchNeuroscience
Paola Pinti, Larisa Maria Dinu, T Smith·bioRxiv·Jun 2, 2024· 2 citations