↓ Skip to main content

What Turns Assistive into Restorative Brain-Machine Interfaces?

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
71 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
What Turns Assistive into Restorative Brain-Machine Interfaces?
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, October 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2016.00456
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alireza Gharabaghi

Abstract

Brain-machine interfaces (BMI) may support motor impaired patients during activities of daily living by controlling external devices such as prostheses (assistive BMI). Moreover, BMIs are applied in conjunction with robotic orthoses for rehabilitation of lost motor function via neurofeedback training (restorative BMI). Using assistive BMI in a rehabilitation context does not automatically turn them into restorative devices. This perspective article suggests key features of restorative BMI and provides the supporting evidence: In summary, BMI may be referred to as restorative tools when demonstrating subsequently (i) operant learning and progressive evolution of specific brain states/dynamics, (ii) correlated modulations of functional networks related to the therapeutic goal, (iii) subsequent improvement in a specific task, and (iv) an explicit correlation between the modulated brain dynamics and the achieved behavioral gains. Such findings would provide the rationale for translating BMI-based interventions into clinical settings for reinforcement learning and motor rehabilitation following stroke.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 71 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 20%
Researcher 12 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 14 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 13 18%
Neuroscience 10 14%
Psychology 8 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 7%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 19 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 16 October 2016.
All research outputs
#19,944,994
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#8,669
of 11,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#238,294
of 325,702 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#94
of 138 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,542 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 325,702 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 138 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.