ArticleBrain computer interfaces (Abingdon, England)2016
SOLICITING BCI USER EXPERIENCE FEEDBACK FROM PEOPLE WITH SEVERE SPEECH AND PHYSICAL IMPAIRMENTS.
Article in Brain computer interfaces (Abingdon, England), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of research on augmentative and alternative communication brain-computer interface systems for individuals with disabilities.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2022Pooled it
- Considering whether brain-computer interfaces have prospective potential to support children who have the physical abilities for touch-based AAC access: a forum manuscript.Augmentative and alternative communication (Baltimore, Md. : 1985) · 2026Article
- RSVP keyboard with inquiry preview: mixed performance and user experience with an adaptive, multimodal typing interface combining EEG and switch input.Journal of neural engineering · 2025Article
- Development and preliminary evaluation of a grid design application for adults and children using scanning and bci-based augmentative and alternative communication.Assistive technology : the official journal of RESNA · 2024Article
- Ethical issues raised by incorporating personalized language models into brain-computer interface communication technologies: a qualitative study of individuals with neurological disease.Disability and rehabilitation. Assistive technology · 2024Article
- What stakeholders with neurodegenerative conditions value about speech and accuracy in development of BCI systems for communication.Brain computer interfaces (Abingdon, England) · 2024Article
- Evaluating the perspectives of those with severe physical impairments while learning BCI control of a commercial augmentative and alternative communication paradigm.Assistive technology : the official journal of RESNA · 2023Article
- Brain Computer Interfaces and Communication Disabilities: Ethical, Legal, and Social Aspects of Decoding Speech From the Brain.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2022Article
- SSVEP BCI and Eye Tracking Use by Individuals With Late-Stage ALS and Visual Impairments.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2020Article
- Critiquing the Concept of BCI Illiteracy.Science and engineering ethics · 2019Article
- Examining sensory ability, feature matching and assessment-based adaptation for a brain-computer interface using the steady-state visually evoked potential.Disability and rehabilitation. Assistive technology · 2019Article
- Using brain-computer interfaces: a scoping review of studies employing social research methods.BMC medical ethics · 2019Article
- New and emerging access technologies for adults with complex communication needs and severe motor impairments: State of the science.Augmentative and alternative communication (Baltimore, Md. : 1985) · 2019Review
- Considering Augmentative and Alternative Communication Research for Brain-Computer Interface Practice.Assistive technology outcomes and benefits · 2019Article
- Guidelines for Feature Matching Assessment of Brain-Computer Interfaces for Augmentative and Alternative Communication.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2018Review
- Effects of simulated visual acuity and ocular motility impairments on SSVEP brain-computer interface performance: An experiment with Shuffle Speller.Brain computer interfaces (Abingdon, England) · 2018Article
- Heading for new shores! Overcoming pitfalls in BCI design.Brain computer interfaces (Abingdon, England) · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Brain-computer interface (BCI) researchers have shown increasing interest in soliciting user experience (UX) feedback, but the severe speech and physical impairments (SSPI) of potential users create barriers to effective implementation with existing feedback instruments. This article describes augmentative and alternative communication (AAC)-based techniques for obtaining feedback from this population, and presents results from administration of a modified questionnaire to 12 individuals with SSPI after trials with a BCI spelling system. The proposed techniques facilitated successful questionnaire completion and provision of narrative feedback for all participants. Questionnaire administration required less than five minutes and minimal effort from participants. Results indicated that individual users may have very different reactions to the same system, and that ratings of workload and comfort provide important information not available through objective performance measures. People with SSPI are critical stakeholders in the future development of BCI, and appropriate adaptation of feedback questionnaires and administration techniques allows them to participate in shaping this assistive technology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.