Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025
Visual ERP-based brain-computer interface use with severe physical, speech and eye movement impairments: case studies.
СтатьяКлинический случайНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Van Den Kerchove Arne, Meunier Juliette, de Moura Marie, Willemssens Alixe, Geeurickx Dorien, Schiettecatte Edward, Van Damme Philip, Si-Mohammed Hakim, Cabestaing François, Allart Etienne, Van Hulle Marc M
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Individuals who experience severe speech and physical impairment face significant challenges in communication and daily interaction. Visual brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) offer a potential assistive solution, but their usability is limited when facing restrictions in eye motor control, gaze redirection and fixation. This study investigates the feasibility of a gaze-independent visual oddball BCI for use as an augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) device in the presence of limited eye motor control.
METHODS: Seven participants with varying degrees of eye motor control were recruited and their conditions were thoroughly assessed. Visual oddball BCI decoding accuracy was evaluated with multiple decoders in three visuospatial attention (VSA) conditions: overt VSA, with fixation cued on the target, covert VSA, with fixation cued on the center of the screen, and free VSA without gaze cue.
RESULTS: covert VSA with central fixation leads to decreased accuracy, whereas free VSA is comparable to overt VSA for some participants. Furthermore, cross-condition decoder training and evaluation suggests that training with overt VSA may improve performance in BCI users experiencing gaze control difficulties.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the need for adaptive decoding strategies and further validation in applied settings in the presence of gaze impairment.
METHODS: Seven participants with varying degrees of eye motor control were recruited and their conditions were thoroughly assessed. Visual oddball BCI decoding accuracy was evaluated with multiple decoders in three visuospatial attention (VSA) conditions: overt VSA, with fixation cued on the target, covert VSA, with fixation cued on the center of the screen, and free VSA without gaze cue.
RESULTS: covert VSA with central fixation leads to decreased accuracy, whereas free VSA is comparable to overt VSA for some participants. Furthermore, cross-condition decoder training and evaluation suggests that training with overt VSA may improve performance in BCI users experiencing gaze control difficulties.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the need for adaptive decoding strategies and further validation in applied settings in the presence of gaze impairment.