Spatio-temporal organization of EEG in premature infants and full-term new-borns

Joseph, Jean-Philippe; Lesèvre, N; Dreyfus-Brisac, C

doi:10.1016/0013-4694(76)90160-7

Cited by 28 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…47 Behavioral criteria of sleep are also different between the two groups, suggesting that sleep organization of the PT neonate to FT and beyond is not entirely equivalent to the FT newborn. These differences comprise elements of sleep architecture.…”

Section: Gestational Age 38 To 42 Weeksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electroencephalography of the Newborn: Normal Features

Scher¹

2006

Clinical Neurophysiology of Infancy, Childhood, and Adolescence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Gestational Age 38 To 42 Weeksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electroencephalography of the Newborn: Normal Features

Scher¹

2006

Clinical Neurophysiology of Infancy, Childhood, and Adolescence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Significance probability mapping (10) and neurometrics ( 12) are two methods that statistically compare quantitative electrophysiological features with appropriate normative data. The prognostic value of quantitative analysis of electrical activity of the newborn infant brain has been explored (18)(19)(20). The absence of activity in different areas of the brain, spatial organization, asynergy, and synchrony provide an indication of outcome (18).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Topographic mapping of brain potentials in the newborn infant: the establishment of normal values and utility in assessing infants with neurological injury

et al. 2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: To demonstrate that quantitative EEG (qEEG) can be used as a non‐invasive measure of brain injury by establishing normative data in term infants and contrasting it with other modalities of brain imaging. Design: qEEG during quiet sleep was performed on 13 healthy full‐term infants comprising a normal group and on 10 infants with neurological abnormalities identified on brain imaging studies (abnormal group) at 36–47 wk postconceptional age. Quantitative analysis was performed and topographic maps were produced for each patient. The EEG data from the normal group, after spectral analysis, yielded power data in the delta, theta, alpha, and beta frequency bands and coherence information, which then formed the normative database. qEEG from the infants in the abnormal group was then compared to this normative data. Results: The normal group's mean absolute power in the delta, theta, alpha, and beta bands for all EEG leads combined were 278.48 ± 83.83, 31.71 ± 10.12, 29.20 ± 2.04, and 35.76 ± 11.35 uv2, respectively. The median frequency was 1.49 ± 0.07, 5.45 ± 3.46, 9.74 ± 5.11, and 18.01 ± 3.38 Hz, respectively. The qEEG was abnormal in all 10 study infants, while abnormalities were noted in the clinical EEG in 4 of 10, in the neuroultrasound in 5 of 10, in the CT in one of 6, and in the MRI in 2 of 2 tested. Conclusions: qEEG appears to be a usefd non‐invasive method for measuring brain injury as it correlates well with other modalities of brain imaging and, if corroborated by further study, may, in fact, be more sensitive in determining abnormalities in brain function.

show abstract

“…For example, Galin et al (1977Galin et al ( , 1979 have shown that 3-year-olds are deficient in cross-modal textural identification and tactile identification when interhemispheric transfer was required, whereas Joseph et al (1984) found that the ability to transfer information between the right and left brain increases with age. In addition, Joseph et al (1976) and Salamy (1978) demonstrated electrophysiologically that interhemispheric linkage in infants and transfer in children below age 3 is incomplete or non-existant in the specific modalities assessed. In addition, Joseph et al (1976) and Salamy (1978) demonstrated electrophysiologically that interhemispheric linkage in infants and transfer in children below age 3 is incomplete or non-existant in the specific modalities assessed.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are now a number of research reports that indicate that young children function as though their right and left cerebral hemispheres were not fully interconnected, such that they appear to have partially split-brains (Finlayson, 1976;Galin, Diamond, & Herron, 1977;Galin, Johnstone, Nakell, & Herron, 1979;Gallagher & Joseph, 1982;Joseph et al, 1984;Joseph, Lesevre, & Dreyfus-Brisac, 1976; Kraft et al, 1980;Salamy, 1978). In this regard, the left hemisphere of a young child does not always seem to know what is going on in the right (Joseph et al, 1984).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, children age 4 (as compared to those 7 or 10) performed deficiently when their left hemisphere was required to verbally describe pictures that had been transmitted tachistoscopically to the right such that their responses were contaminated by confabulatory ideation. In addition, Joseph et al (1976) and Salamy (1978) demonstrated electrophysiologically that interhemispheric linkage in infants and transfer in children below age 3 is incomplete or non-existant in the specific modalities assessed.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Interhemispheric transfer and the completion of reversible operations in non-conserving children

Joseph

Gallagher

1985

J. Clin. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evidence that concerns interhemispheric transfer deficits in young children is reviewed, and it is suggested that the late maturation of the corpus callosum may prevent the transfer and thus verbal expression of knowledge concerning equivalence relationships in non‐conservers — operations normally performed by the right hemisphere. Because previous findings with “split‐brain” patients indicate that interhemispheric transfer can be achieved when questions are phrased in the context of a reward (e.g., “preference”), questions concerning the conservation of a non‐equivalent volume were posed to 65 non‐conservers in terms of an imagined reward (preference condition). Questions also were phrased so as to require comparative‐relational determinations as well as expectation of an empirical reversal of the stimulus conditions so as to determine differences/similarities in the reasoning process. Significantly more non‐conservers demonstrated an awareness of empirical reversal or performed the preference relational operation correctly as compared to conditions that required comparative‐relational judgments. The evidence also suggests the presence of two fundamentally distinct cognitive approaches to the problem, which appear to resist integration in children of this age group.

show abstract

Spatio-temporal organization of EEG in premature infants and full-term new-borns

Cited by 28 publications

References 16 publications

Electroencephalography of the Newborn: Normal Features

Electroencephalography of the Newborn: Normal Features

Topographic mapping of brain potentials in the newborn infant: the establishment of normal values and utility in assessing infants with neurological injury

Interhemispheric transfer and the completion of reversible operations in non-conserving children

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About