Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28113942›Full record

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

Decoding Local Field Potentials for Neural Interfaces.

Andrew Jackson, Thomas M Hall

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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.

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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 80 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Full-Stack Architectures for Intelligent Brain-Computer Interfaces.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Classification of Odor-Derived Electroantennograms with Machine Learning.Integrative organismal biology (Oxford, England) · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Neural Decoding for Intracortical Brain-Computer Interfaces.Cyborg and bionic systems (Washington, D.C.) · 2023
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Andrew Jackson
Thomas M Hall
University of Newcastle Australia · AU

Funding

Medical Research Council G0802195Medical Research Council K501396Wellcome Trust 106149
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The stability and frequency content of local field potentials (LFPs) offer key advantages for long-term, low-power neural interfaces. However, interpreting LFPs may require new signal processing techniques which should be informed by a scientific understanding of how these recordings arise from the coordinated activity of underlying neuronal populations. We review current approaches to decoding LFPs for brain-machine interface (BMI) applications, and suggest several directions for future research. To facilitate an improved understanding of the relationship between LFPs and spike activity, we share a dataset of multielectrode recordings from monkey motor cortex, and describe two unsupervised analysis methods we have explored for extracting a low-dimensional feature space that is amenable to biomimetic decoding and biofeedback training.

Indexed as

Brain-Computer InterfacesAction PotentialsAnimalsBrainHaplorhiniHumansMacaca mulattaSignal Processing, Computer-Assisted

Identifiers

PMID28113942
PMCPMC6051483
OpenAlexW2556174952

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.