Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28207882›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Improving brain computer interface research through user involvement - The transformative potential of integrating civil society organisations in research projects.

Bernd Carsten Stahl, Kutoma Wakunuma, Stephen Rainey, Christian Hansen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Stakeholder engagement in European brain research: Experiences of the Lifebrain consortium.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023
    Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Bernd Carsten StahlCentre for Computing and Social Responsibility, School of Computer Science and Informatics, De Montfort University, Leicester, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4058-4456
Kutoma WakunumaCentre for Computing and Social Responsibility, School of Computer Science and Informatics, De Montfort University, Leicester, United Kingdom.
Stephen RaineyCentre for Computing and Social Responsibility, School of Computer Science and Informatics, De Montfort University, Leicester, United Kingdom.
Christian HansenCentre for Computing and Social Responsibility, School of Computer Science and Informatics, De Montfort University, Leicester, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Research on Brain Computer Interfaces (BCI) often aims to provide solutions for vulnerable populations, such as individuals with diseases, conditions or disabilities that keep them from using traditional interfaces. Such research thereby contributes to the public good. This contribution to the public good corresponds to a broader drive of research and funding policy that focuses on promoting beneficial societal impact. One way of achieving this is to engage with the public. In practical terms this can be done by integrating civil society organisations (CSOs) in research. The open question at the heart of this paper is whether and how such CSO integration can transform the research and contribute to the public good. To answer this question the paper describes five detailed qualitative case studies of research projects including CSOs. The paper finds that transformative impact of CSO integration is possible but by no means assured. It provides recommendations on how transformative impact can be promoted.

Indexed as

Brain-Computer InterfacesCommunity ParticipationOrganizationsHumansPublic HealthQualitative ResearchResearch Design

Identifiers

PMID28207882
PMCPMC5313172

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.