Table 3.
Diagnostic validation of language mapping with high-γ modulation (HGM) against conventional electrical cortical stimulation (ECS): Patients with right hemisphere electrodes
| Overt naming | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Patient ID | ECS + | HGM + | ECS + | HGM − | ECS − | HGM + | ECS − | HGM − |
| R1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 9 |
| R2 | 6 | 0 | 3 | 10 |
| R3 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 16 |
| R4 | 1 | 11 | 3 | 29 |
| R5 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 21 |
| R6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 16 |
| R7 | 2 | 1 | 7 | 19 |
| N = 7 | 11 | 14 | 28 | 120 |
| Summary statistics (95% CI) | ||||
| Sensitivity | 0.44 (0.26, 0.63) | |||
| Specificity | 0.81 (0.78, 0.84) | |||
| Accuracy | 0.76 (0.71, 0.81) | |||
| MH test | p = 0.006 | |||
| Covert naming | ||||
| Patient ID | ECS+ | HGM + | ECS + | HGM - | ECS - | HGM + | ECS - | HGM - |
| R1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 11 |
| R2 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 13 |
| R3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 22 |
| R4 | 1 | 11 | 4 | 28 |
| R6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 16 |
| R7 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 26 |
| N = 6 | 5 | 20 | 5 | 116 |
| Summary statistics (95% CI) | ||||
| Sensitivity | 0.20 (0.08, 0.32) | |||
| Specificity | 0.96 (0.94, 0.98) | |||
| Accuracy | 0.83 (0.79, 0.87) | |||
| MH test | p = 0.004 | |||
(Notes: ECS+ represents only electrodes with oral motor dysfunction during stimulation (defined in the text) in this table, MH Mantel-Haenszel test)