{"success":true,"database":"eegdash","data":{"_id":"69a33a3b897a7725c66f3eec","dataset_id":"ds007347","associated_paper_doi":null,"authors":["W. Jeffrey Elias","Chang-Chia Liu","Divine Nwafor","Patrick H. Finan","Mark Quigg","Shayan Moosa"],"bids_version":"1.8.0","contact_info":["CHANG-CHIA LIU"],"contributing_labs":null,"data_processed":false,"dataset_doi":"doi:10.18112/openneuro.ds007347.v1.0.0","datatypes":["eeg"],"demographics":{"subjects_count":5,"ages":[],"age_min":null,"age_max":null,"age_mean":null,"species":null,"sex_distribution":null,"handedness_distribution":null},"experimental_modalities":null,"external_links":{"source_url":"https://openneuro.org/datasets/ds007347","osf_url":null,"github_url":null,"paper_url":null},"funding":[],"ingestion_fingerprint":"f8cd244ff554d4c608fa23c315e757883c3e4923213111a1d2fc8d739b4b035f","license":"CC0","n_contributing_labs":null,"name":"Sterotactic Focused Ultrasound Mesencephalotomy for the Treatment of Head and Neck Cancer Pain","readme":"# README\n# WARNING\nBelow is a template to write a README file for this BIDS dataset. If this message is still present, it means that the person exporting the file has decided not to update the template.If you are the researcher editing this README file, please remove this warning section.\nThe README is usually the starting point for researchers using your dataand serves as a guidepost for users of your data. A clear and informativeREADME makes your data much more usable.\nIn general you can include information in the README that is not captured by some otherfiles in the BIDS dataset (dataset_description.json, events.tsv, ...).\nIt can also be useful to also include information that might already bepresent in another file of the dataset but might be important for users to be aware ofbefore preprocessing or analysing the data.\nIf the README gets too long you have the possibility to create a `/doc` folderand add it to the `.bidsignore` file to make sure it is ignored by the BIDS validator.\nMore info here: https://neurostars.org/t/where-in-a-bids-dataset-should-i-put-notes-about-individual-mri-acqusitions/17315/3\n## Details related to access to the data\n- [ ] Data user agreement\nIf the dataset requires a data user agreement, link to the relevant information.\n- [ ] Contact person\nIndicate the name and contact details (email and ORCID) of the person responsible for additional information.\n- [ ] Practical information to access the data\nIf there is any special information related to access rights orhow to download the data make sure to include it.For example, if the dataset was curated using datalad,make sure to include the relevant section from the datalad handbook:http://handbook.datalad.org/en/latest/basics/101-180-FAQ.html#how-can-i-help-others-get-started-with-a-shared-dataset\n## Overview\n- [ ] Project name (if relevant)\n- [ ] Year(s) that the project ran\nIf no `scans.tsv` is included, this could at least cover when the data acquisitionstarter and ended. Local time of day is particularly relevant to subject state.\n- [ ] Brief overview of the tasks in the experiment\nA paragraph giving an overview of the experiment. This should include thegoals or purpose and a discussion about how the experiment tries to achievethese goals.\n- [ ] Description of the contents of the dataset\nAn easy thing to add is the output of the bids-validator that describes what type ofdata and the number of subject one can expect to find in the dataset.\n- [ ] Independent variables\nA brief discussion of condition variables (sometimes called contrastsor independent variables) that were varied across the experiment.\n- [ ] Dependent variables\nA brief discussion of the response variables (sometimes called thedependent variables) that were measured and or calculated to assessthe effects of varying the condition variables. This might also includequestionnaires administered to assess behavioral aspects of the experiment.\n- [ ] Control variables\nA brief discussion of the control variables --- that is what aspectswere explicitly controlled in this experiment. The control variables mightinclude subject pool, environmental conditions, set up, or other thingsthat were explicitly controlled.\n- [ ] Quality assessment of the data\nProvide a short summary of the quality of the data ideally with descriptive statistics if relevantand with a link to more comprehensive description (like with MRIQC) if possible.\n## Methods\n### Subjects\nA brief sentence about the subject pool in this experiment.\nRemember that `Control` or `Patient` status should be defined in the `participants.tsv`using a group column.\n- [ ] Information about the recruitment procedure- [ ] Subject inclusion criteria (if relevant)- [ ] Subject exclusion criteria (if relevant)\n### Apparatus\nA summary of the equipment and environment setup for theexperiment. For example, was the experiment performed in a shielded roomwith the subject seated in a fixed position.\n### Initial setup\nA summary of what setup was performed when a subject arrived.\n### Task organization\nHow the tasks were organized for a session.This is particularly important because BIDS datasets usually have task dataseparated into different files.)\n- [ ] Was task order counter-balanced?- [ ] What other activities were interspersed between tasks?\n- [ ] In what order were the tasks and other activities performed?\n### Task details\nAs much detail as possible about the task and the events that were recorded.\n### Additional data acquired\nA brief indication of data other than theimaging data that was acquired as part of this experiment. In additionto data from other modalities and behavioral data, this might includequestionnaires and surveys, swabs, and clinical information. Indicatethe availability of this data.\nThis is especially relevant if the data are not included in a `phenotype` folder.https://bids-specification.readthedocs.io/en/stable/03-modality-agnostic-files.html#phenotypic-and-assessment-data\n### Experimental location\nThis should include any additional information regarding thethe geographical location and facility that cannot be includedin the relevant json files.\n### Missing data\nMention something if some participants are missing some aspects of the data.This can take the form of a processing log and/or abnormalities about the dataset.\nSome examples:\n- A brain lesion or defect only present in one participant- Some experimental conditions missing on a given run for a participant because  of some technical issue.- Any noticeable feature of the data for certain participants- Differences (even slight) in protocol for certain participants.\n### Notes\nAny additional information or pointers to information thatmight be helpful to users of the dataset. Include qualitative informationrelated to how the data acquisition went.","recording_modality":["eeg"],"senior_author":"Shayan Moosa","sessions":["1","2","3"],"size_bytes":1767378590,"source":"openneuro","storage":{"backend":"s3","base":"s3://openneuro.org/ds007347","raw_key":"dataset_description.json","dep_keys":["CHANGES","README","participants.json","participants.tsv","task-resting_events.json"]},"study_design":null,"study_domain":null,"tasks":["resting"],"timestamps":{"digested_at":"2026-04-22T12:30:10.986799+00:00","dataset_created_at":"2026-01-29T20:38:46.768Z","dataset_modified_at":"2026-01-29T20:56:41.000Z"},"total_files":10,"computed_title":"Sterotactic Focused Ultrasound Mesencephalotomy for the Treatment of Head and Neck Cancer Pain","nchans_counts":[{"val":50,"count":6},{"val":102,"count":4}],"sfreq_counts":[{"val":256.0,"count":6},{"val":512.0,"count":4}],"stats_computed_at":"2026-04-22T23:16:00.312618+00:00","total_duration_s":16105.0,"tagger_meta":{"config_hash":"3557b68bca409f28","metadata_hash":"20afab91d8473177","model":"openai/gpt-5.2","tagged_at":"2026-04-07T09:32:40.872789+00:00"},"tags":{"pathology":["Cancer"],"modality":["Resting State"],"type":["Clinical/Intervention"],"confidence":{"pathology":0.8,"modality":0.7,"type":0.7},"reasoning":{"few_shot_analysis":"Closest few-shot conventions: (1) The dementia resting-state dataset is labeled with Modality=Resting State and Type=Clinical/Intervention when the dataset is explicitly about a clinical condition and aims at clinical characterization/diagnosis/intervention rather than a cognitive task (it states 'resting state-closed eyes recordings' and includes AD/FTD patients). (2) The pediatric epilepsy HFO dataset also uses Type=Clinical/Intervention for a clinically recruited cohort with non-cognitive-state recordings/annotations. These examples guide mapping: explicit disease/intervention focus + resting recording -> Pathology = the clinical condition, Modality = Resting State, Type = Clinical/Intervention (not Resting-state type).","metadata_analysis":"Key metadata facts:\n- Clinical condition & intervention focus is explicit in the dataset naming: title is \"Sterotactic Focused Ultrasound Mesencephalotomy for the Treatment of Head and Neck Cancer Pain\".\n- dataset_description repeats the same: \"Name: Sterotactic Focused Ultrasound Mesencephalotomy for the Treatment of Head and Neck Cancer Pain\".\n- The only task listed is resting: tasks = [\"resting\"].\n- No additional task/stimulus details are provided because the README remains a template (\"WARNING ... template ... decided not to update the template\").","paper_abstract_analysis":"No useful paper information.","evidence_alignment_check":"Pathology:\n1) Metadata says: \"Treatment of Head and Neck Cancer Pain\" (title/name) -> clinical cancer population implied.\n2) Few-shot pattern suggests: when disease is explicit in dataset description/title, use that disease label (e.g., Parkinson's, Dementia, Epilepsy examples).\n3) ALIGN (explicit clinical condition present).\n\nModality:\n1) Metadata says: tasks = [\"resting\"].\n2) Few-shot pattern suggests: datasets with \"rest\" / no task are labeled Modality = \"Resting State\" (e.g., Dementia resting-state example; sleep-deprivation resting example).\n3) ALIGN.\n\nType:\n1) Metadata says: intervention/treatment study focus: \"Focused Ultrasound Mesencephalotomy\" and \"Treatment of ... Cancer Pain\".\n2) Few-shot pattern suggests: clinically recruited/intervention-focused datasets are Type = \"Clinical/Intervention\" even if recording is resting (e.g., Dementia resting-state labeled Clinical/Intervention; Epilepsy HFO labeled Clinical/Intervention).\n3) ALIGN; no conflict with metadata. (Type is not set to Resting-state because the primary purpose appears clinical/interventional rather than basic resting-state cognition research.)","decision_summary":"Top-2 candidates per category and final selection:\n\nPathology:\n- Candidate 1: Cancer — Supported by \"Treatment of Head and Neck Cancer Pain\" (title) and repeated in \"Name: ... Head and Neck Cancer Pain\" (dataset_description).\n- Candidate 2: Other — Would apply only if cancer were not explicit or recruitment were unclear.\nHead-to-head: Cancer wins due to explicit disease term in title/name (metadata fact). Confidence=0.8 (2 explicit supporting quotes).\n\nModality:\n- Candidate 1: Resting State — Supported by tasks = [\"resting\"].\n- Candidate 2: Unknown — If 'resting' were ambiguous or tasks missing.\nHead-to-head: Resting State wins due to explicit task label. Confidence=0.7 (1 explicit supporting quote; minimal other task detail).\n\nType:\n- Candidate 1: Clinical/Intervention — Supported by \"Focused Ultrasound Mesencephalotomy\" and \"Treatment\" framing in title/name, matching few-shot convention that clinical/intervention datasets get this Type.\n- Candidate 2: Resting-state — Possible since task is resting, but would imply the primary research construct is resting-state brain dynamics rather than treatment/clinical focus.\nHead-to-head: Clinical/Intervention wins because the dataset is explicitly about a treatment for cancer pain. Confidence=0.7 (1 strong explicit quote + few-shot analogs; limited additional metadata)."}},"author_year":"Elias2026","canonical_name":null}}