Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22325364›Full record

ReviewMayo Clinic proceedings2012

Brain-computer interfaces in medicine.

Jerry J Shih, Dean J Krusienski, Jonathan R Wolpaw

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Mayo Clinic proceedings, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 147 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
147citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
11.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03374319 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2017, after this paper: background citation

Somatotopic Configuration of Distal Residual Limb Tissues in Lower Extremity Amputations

TypeinterventionalSponsorBrigham and Women's HospitalRan2017 to 2024Enrolled50ConditionsAmputationArmsModified amputation procedure
NCT03882073 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

A Novel Approach to Upper Extremity Amputation to Augment Volitional Control and Restore Proprioception

TypeinterventionalSponsorBrigham and Women's HospitalRan2019 to 2026Enrolled20ConditionsAmputationArmsModified amputation procedure, Standard amputation procedure
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

147 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 702 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. The foundational role of autonomy for brain-computer interfaces.Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Organoid Brain-Machine-Interface Devices for Central Nervous System Repair.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

87 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jerry J ShihDepartment of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, 4500 San Pablo Rd., Jacksonville, FL 32224, USA. shih.jerry@mayo.edu
Dean J Krusienski
Jonathan R Wolpaw
Jacksonville College · USNew York State Department of Health · USOld Dominion University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) acquire brain signals, analyze them, and translate them into commands that are relayed to output devices that carry out desired actions. BCIs do not use normal neuromuscular output pathways. The main goal of BCI is to replace or restore useful function to people disabled by neuromuscular disorders such as amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, cerebral palsy, stroke, or spinal cord injury. From initial demonstrations of electroencephalography-based spelling and single-neuron-based device control, researchers have gone on to use electroencephalographic, intracortical, electrocorticographic, and other brain signals for increasingly complex control of cursors, robotic arms, prostheses, wheelchairs, and other devices. Brain-computer interfaces may also prove useful for rehabilitation after stroke and for other disorders. In the future, they might augment the performance of surgeons or other medical professionals. Brain-computer interface technology is the focus of a rapidly growing research and development enterprise that is greatly exciting scientists, engineers, clinicians, and the public in general. Its future achievements will depend on advances in 3 crucial areas. Brain-computer interfaces need signal-acquisition hardware that is convenient, portable, safe, and able to function in all environments. Brain-computer interface systems need to be validated in long-term studies of real-world use by people with severe disabilities, and effective and viable models for their widespread dissemination must be implemented. Finally, the day-to-day and moment-to-moment reliability of BCI performance must be improved so that it approaches the reliability of natural muscle-based function.

Indexed as

BrainMan-Machine SystemsUser-Computer InterfaceElectrodes, ImplantedElectroencephalographyHumansSignal Processing, Computer-Assisted

Identifiers

PMID22325364
PMCPMC3497935
OpenAlexW2146978355

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.