Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BackgroundResting-state EEG microstate analysis indexes large-scale network dynamics, yet the value of ratio-normalized temporal parameters under the eyes-open resting (EOR) condition remains unexplored across the cognitive decline continuum.ObjectiveTo examine whether ratio-normalized microstate parameters from four- and seven-class clustering solutions under EOR differentiate healthy controls (HC), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and Alzheimer's disease (AD).MethodsOne hundred and eighty participants (HC, MCI, and AD; n = 60 each) were recruited from a hospital-based cohort in an elderly Korean population. Resting-state EEG recorded under EOR was analyzed using MICROSTATELAB in EEGLAB. Absolute temporal parameters (duration, occurrence, coverage) and ratio-normalized forms (relative duration, relative occurrence) were compared using ANCOVA with age as covariate, false discovery rate (FDR) correction, and Bonferroni-corrected post-hoc comparisons.ResultsIn the four-class solution, three parameters reached nominal significance, none surviving FDR correction across the full set of 20 tests: coverage of Microstate B (visual network; F(2176) = 3.561, p = 0.030), relative occurrence of Microstate B (F(2176) = 5.281, p = 0.006), and relative occurrence of Microstate E (executive network; F(2176) = 3.816, p = 0.024). MCI showed higher visual and lower executive microstate engagement than AD (p ≤ 0.023); no contrast involving HC was significant. Absolute occurrence parameters were non-significant whereas their ratio-normalized counterparts were significant. The seven-class solution yielded no corrected effects.ConclusionsRatio-normalized EOR microstate parameters distinguished MCI from AD through visual and executive network engagement, with small-to-moderate effects and HC intermediate. The four-class solution outperformed the seven-class solution, contrasting with eyes-closed reports. As these analyses were exploratory and did not survive correction, confirmation in independent cohorts is required.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Simfukwe et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: