Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29986504›Full record

ArticleBrain sciences2018

Code-VEP vs. Eye Tracking: A Comparison Study.

Hooman Nezamfar, Seyed Sadegh Mohseni Salehi, Matt Higger, Deniz Erdogmus

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain sciences, 2018. 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
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Robust Fusion of c-VEP and Gaze.IEEE sensors letters · 2019
    Article
  5. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hooman NezamfarCognitive Systems Laboratory, Electrical and Computer Engineering Department, Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA. nezamfar@ece.neu.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-4958-9357
Seyed Sadegh Mohseni SalehiCognitive Systems Laboratory, Electrical and Computer Engineering Department, Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA. ssalehi@ece.neu.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-6085-3580
Matt HiggerCognitive Systems Laboratory, Electrical and Computer Engineering Department, Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA. higger@ece.neu.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-6384-9114
Deniz ErdogmusCognitive Systems Laboratory, Electrical and Computer Engineering Department, Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA. erdogmus@ece.neu.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-1114-3539
Northeastern University · US

Funding

Translational refinement of adaptive communication system for locked-in patientsR01DC009834 · NIDCD · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI FRIED-OKEN, MELANIE · 2009 to 2024
$12.5M
NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC009834
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Even with state-of-the-art techniques there are individuals whose paralysis prevents them from communicating with others. Brain⁻Computer-Interfaces (BCI) aim to utilize brain waves to construct a voice for those whose needs remain unmet. In this paper we compare the efficacy of a BCI input signal, code-VEP via Electroencephalography, against eye gaze tracking, among the most popular modalities used. These results, on healthy individuals without paralysis, suggest that while eye tracking works well for some, it does not work well or at all for others; the latter group includes individuals with corrected vision or those who squint their eyes unintentionally while focusing on a task. It is also evident that the performance of the interface is more sensitive to head/body movements when eye tracking is used as the input modality, compared to using c-VEP. Sensitivity to head/body movement could be better in eye tracking systems which are tracking the head or mounted on the face and are designed specifically as assistive devices. The sample interface developed for this assessment has the same reaction time when driven with c-VEP or with eye tracking; approximately 0.5⁻1 second is needed to make a selection among the four options simultaneously presented. Factors, such as system reaction time and robustness play a crucial role in participant preferences.

Indexed as

BCIc-VEPEEGeye trackingSSVEP

Identifiers

PMID29986504
PMCPMC6071120
OpenAlexW2857197982

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.