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.
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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Transient effects in corticospinal and reticulospinal tract excitability induced by motor skill and isometric resistance training.Brain research · 2026Article
- Regional specialization of movement encoding across the primate sensorimotor cortex.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Motor improvements enabled by spinal cord stimulation combined with physical training after spinal cord injury: review of experimental evidence in animals and humans.Bioelectronic medicine · 2021Review
- EEG-Controlled Wall-Crawling Cleaning Robot Using SSVEP-Based Brain-Computer Interface.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2020Article
- Data-driven body-machine interface for the accurate control of drones.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
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
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.