Comparison of Site Localization Techniques for Brain Stimulation
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 6, 2026

Brain State-dependent Brain Stimulation with Real-time Electroencephalography-Triggered Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
Published on: August 20, 2019
Stevan Nikolin, Olav DʼSouza1, Vedran Vulovic
1Consultation Liaison Advanced Trainee RANZCP.
Objectives:
The dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) is a commonly targeted site using noninvasive brain stimulation techniques. Methods used to localize this site commonly rely on the International 10-20 electroencephalography (EEG) system, including elastic EEG caps, which stretch to accommodate varying head sizes, as well as the Beam F3 algorithm, which uses scalp measurements to calculate the location of the DLPFC. Both methods have been validated against magnetic resonance imaging-based DLPFC localization and are regularly used in research centers and clinics, but an in vivo comparison of reliability has not yet been conducted. This study examines whether Beam F3 and EEG cap methods differ in DLPFC localization, when applied by different practitioners (measurers) on a range of subjects. Further, whether measurer experience or subject head characteristics influence localization.
Methods:
Measurers (n = 5) of varying levels of experience identified the location of the left DLFPC on subjects (n = 6) with varying head sizes, using both Beam F3 and EEG cap methods. An independent assessor recorded the measurers' placements along the anterior-posterior and medial-lateral planes. Values were normalized to the subjects' mean nasion-inion and tragus-tragus distances and examined using a mixed effects repeated measures analysis.
Results:
The Beam F3 method resulted in significantly more anterior placements (~11.5 mm) compared with the EEG cap. Subjects with smaller head sizes had more anterior placements, compared with medium and large heads, regardless of the method used. There was no significant difference between methods along the medial-lateral plane. Measurer experience did not significantly influence DLPFC localization.
Conclusions:
Beam F3 and EEG cap methods resulted in similar DLPFC placements, with a small difference along the anterior-posterior plane. Measurer experience did not affect either method, suggesting that 2 weeks of training is sufficient to achieve competency. Training and reliability of DLPFC placement therefore do not represent substantial barriers to application of either method. Special care should be taken with subjects with small heads as both methods resulted in more anterior DLPFC placements.
More Related Videos
08:23A Multimodal Imaging- and Stimulation-based Method of Evaluating Connectivity-related Brain Excitability in Patients with Epilepsy
Published on: November 13, 2016
11:33Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Investigating Causal Brain-behavioral Relationships and their Time Course
Published on: July 18, 2014
Related Concept Videos
The Sense of Self: Reflected Self-Appraisal and Social Comparison
Multiple Comparison Tests
It would be easy to compare two samples using a significance alpha level of 0.05. In other words, there is only one sample pair to be compared. However, it would be difficult to identify a significantly different sample if the number...
Evolutionary Relationships through Genome Comparisons
Comparison Between Electrical And Gravitational Forces
Since both are inverse square law forces, the distance gets canceled when the ratio of the two forces is considered. Instead, the ratio of the electrical and gravitational forces depends on...
Comparison between RL and RC circuits
Molecular Comparison of Gases, Liquids, and Solids