Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28092564›Full record

ArticleIEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society2017

Static Versus Dynamic Decoding Algorithms in a Non-Invasive Body-Machine Interface.

Ismael Seanez-Gonzalez, Camilla Pierella, Ali Farshchiansadegh, Elias B Thorp, Farnaz Abdollahi, Jessica P Pedersen, Ferdinando A Sandro Mussa-Ivaldi

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation StudyVideo-Audio Media
In one paragraph

Article in IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Data-driven body-machine interface for the accurate control of drones.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2018
    Article
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

7 authors.

Ismael Seanez-Gonzalez
Camilla Pierella
Ali Farshchiansadegh
Elias B Thorp
Farnaz Abdollahi
Jessica P Pedersen
Ferdinando A Sandro Mussa-Ivaldi

Funding

Motor Learning in a Customized Body-Machine Interface for Persons with ParalysisR01HD072080 · NICHD · REHABILITATION INSTITUTE OF CHICAGO D/B/A SHIRLEY RYAN ABILITYLAB · PI MUSSA-IVALDI, FERDINANDO ALESSANDRO · 2012 to 2016
$1.4M
Body-machine interfaces after spinal injury: rehabilitation and brain plasticityF31NS090877 · NINDS · NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY · PI SEANEZ, ISMAEL · 2014 to 2016
$73k
NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD072080NINDS NIH HHS F31 NS090877
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this study, we consider a non-invasive body-machine interface that captures body motions still available to people with spinal cord injury (SCI) and maps them into a set of signals for controlling a computer user interface while engaging in a sustained level of mobility and exercise. We compare the effectiveness of two decoding algorithms that transform a high-dimensional body-signal vector into a lower dimensional control vector on six subjects with high-level SCI and eight controls. One algorithm is based on a static map from current body signals to the current value of the control vector set through principal component analysis (PCA), the other on dynamic mapping a segment of body signals to the value and the temporal derivatives of the control vector set through a Kalman filter. SCI and control participants performed straighter and smoother cursor movements with the Kalman algorithm during center-out reaching, but their movements were faster and more precise when using PCA. All participants were able to use the BMI's continuous, two-dimensional control to type on a virtual keyboard and play pong, and performance with both algorithms was comparable. However, seven of eight control participants preferred PCA as their method of virtual wheelchair control. The unsupervised PCA algorithm was easier to train and seemed sufficient to achieve a higher degree of learnability and perceived ease of use.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsMan-Machine SystemsMovementSignal Processing, Computer-AssistedActigraphyAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPattern Recognition, AutomatedPrincipal Component AnalysisReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificitySpinal Cord InjuriesUnsupervised Machine Learning

Identifiers

PMID28092564
PMCPMC5472505

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.