↓ Skip to main content

Non-motor tasks improve adaptive brain-computer interface performance in users with severe motor impairment

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Non-motor tasks improve adaptive brain-computer interface performance in users with severe motor impairment
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, October 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2014.00320
Pubmed ID
Authors

Josef Faller, Reinhold Scherer, Elisabeth V. C. Friedrich, Ursula Costa, Eloy Opisso, Josep Medina, Gernot R. Müller-Putz

Abstract

Individuals with severe motor impairment can use event-related desynchronization (ERD) based BCIs as assistive technology. Auto-calibrating and adaptive ERD-based BCIs that users control with motor imagery tasks ("SMR-AdBCI") have proven effective for healthy users. We aim to find an improved configuration of such an adaptive ERD-based BCI for individuals with severe motor impairment as a result of spinal cord injury (SCI) or stroke. We hypothesized that an adaptive ERD-based BCI, that automatically selects a user specific class-combination from motor-related and non motor-related mental tasks during initial auto-calibration ("Auto-AdBCI") could allow for higher control performance than a conventional SMR-AdBCI. To answer this question we performed offline analyses on two sessions (21 data sets total) of cue-guided, five-class electroencephalography (EEG) data recorded from individuals with SCI or stroke. On data from the twelve individuals in Session 1, we first identified three bipolar derivations for the SMR-AdBCI. In a similar way, we determined three bipolar derivations and four mental tasks for the Auto-AdBCI. We then simulated both, the SMR-AdBCI and the Auto-AdBCI configuration on the unseen data from the nine participants in Session 2 and compared the results. On the unseen data of Session 2 from individuals with SCI or stroke, we found that automatically selecting a user specific class-combination from motor-related and non motor-related mental tasks during initial auto-calibration (Auto-AdBCI) significantly (p < 0.01) improved classification performance compared to an adaptive ERD-based BCI that only used motor imagery tasks (SMR-AdBCI; average accuracy of 75.7 vs. 66.3%).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 74 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 20%
Student > Master 10 13%
Student > Bachelor 9 12%
Student > Postgraduate 8 11%
Researcher 7 9%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 17 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 13 17%
Computer Science 6 8%
Engineering 6 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 5%
Other 16 21%
Unknown 25 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 November 2014.
All research outputs
#6,409,980
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#4,252
of 11,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,418
of 268,209 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#36
of 114 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,538 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 268,209 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 114 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.