Reliability of fully automated versus visually controlled pre- and post-processing of resting-state EEG

• Automated processing of resting state quantitative EEG is as reliable as visually controlled processing.
• Reduced inter-rater reliability is avoided by automated EEG processing.
• Automated processing of EEG is less time consuming and reduces the need for trained raters.

ObjectiveTo compare the reliability of a newly developed Matlab® toolbox for the fully automated, pre- and post-processing of resting state EEG (automated analysis, AA) with the reliability of analysis involving visually controlled pre- and post-processing (VA).Methods34 healthy volunteers (age: median 38.2 (20–49), 82% female) had three consecutive 256-channel resting-state EEG at one year intervals. Results of frequency analysis of AA and VA were compared with Pearson correlation coefficients, and reliability over time was assessed with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC).ResultsMean correlation coefficient between AA and VA was 0.94 ± 0.07, mean ICC for AA 0.83 ± 0.05 and for VA 0.84 ± 0.07.ConclusionAA and VA yield very similar results for spectral EEG analysis and are equally reliable. AA is less time-consuming, completely standardized, and independent of raters and their training.SignificanceAutomated processing of EEG facilitates workflow in quantitative EEG analysis.