Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29318256›Full record

ReviewAmerican journal of speech-language pathology2018

Brain-Computer Interfaces for Augmentative and Alternative Communication: A Tutorial.

Jonathan S Brumberg, Kevin M Pitt, Alana Mantie-Kozlowski, Jeremy D Burnison

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in American journal of speech-language pathology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 97 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Identifying P300 brain-computer interface training strategies for AAC in children: a focus group study.Augmentative and alternative communication (Baltimore, Md. : 1985) · 2026
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Harnessing the Power of Artificial Intelligence in Otolaryngology and the Communication Sciences.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2022
    Review
  20. Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jonathan S BrumbergDepartment of Speech-Language-Hearing: Sciences and Disorders, Neuroscience Graduate Program, The University of Kansas, Lawrence.
Kevin M PittDepartment of Speech-Language-Hearing: Sciences and Disorders, The University of Kansas, Lawrence.
Alana Mantie-KozlowskiCommunication Sciences and Disorders Department, Missouri State University, Springfield.
Jeremy D BurnisonNeuroscience Graduate Program, The University of Kansas, Lawrence.
University of Kansas · USMissouri State University · US

Funding

Using PCORnet to Expand the DS-CONNECT Cohort Through Healthcare System Recruitment, Incorporating Electronic Health Records, and Assessing Self-DeterminationU54HD090216 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS LAWRENCE · PI HOFFMAN, LESA R · 2016 to 2020
$6.2M
Investigating output modality for a brain-computer interface for communicationR03DC011304 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS LAWRENCE · PI BRUMBERG, JONATHAN S · 2011 to 2013
$439k
NICHD NIH HHS U54 HD090216NIDCD NIH HHS R03 DC011304
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) have the potential to improve communication for people who require but are unable to use traditional augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) devices. As BCIs move toward clinical practice, speech-language pathologists (SLPs) will need to consider their appropriateness for AAC intervention. Method: This tutorial provides a background on BCI approaches to provide AAC specialists foundational knowledge necessary for clinical application of BCI. Tutorial descriptions were generated based on a literature review of BCIs for restoring communication. Results: The tutorial responses directly address 4 major areas of interest for SLPs who specialize in AAC: (a) the current state of BCI with emphasis on SLP scope of practice (including the subareas: the way in which individuals access AAC with BCI, the efficacy of BCI for AAC, and the effects of fatigue), (b) populations for whom BCI is best suited, (c) the future of BCI as an addition to AAC access strategies, and (d) limitations of BCI. Conclusion: Current BCIs have been designed as access methods for AAC rather than a replacement; therefore, SLPs can use existing knowledge in AAC as a starting point for clinical application. Additional training is recommended to stay updated with rapid advances in BCI.

Indexed as

Brain-Computer InterfacesCommunication Devices for People with DisabilitiesCommunicationFatigueHumansPatient SelectionSpeech Disorders

Identifiers

PMID29318256
PMCPMC5968329
OpenAlexW2784305927

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.