ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2020
Clinician awareness of brain computer interfaces: a Canadian national survey.
Article in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Global Trends in Research of Brain-Computer Interfaces in Neuroscience From 2014 to 2023: A Bibliometric Analysis.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2026Review
- From technological closed-loop to human-machine trust: a systematic review of ethical and communication challenges of brain-computer interface in elderly care.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Brain-computer interface: an update for the clinicians.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2026Review
- Brain-computer interfaces in pediatric populations: research advances, application challenges, and future directions.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Review
- Recommendations for Combining Brain-Computer Interface, Motor Imagery, and Virtual Reality in Upper Limb Stroke Rehabilitation: Qualitative Participatory Design Study.JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies · 2025Article
- BCI move: exploring pediatric BCI-controlled power mobility.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Article
- Article
- Signal acquisition of brain-computer interfaces: A medical-engineering crossover perspective review.Fundamental research · 2025Review
- BCI-activated electrical stimulation in children with perinatal stroke and hemiparesis: A pilot study.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2023Article
- Neurosurgical Team Acceptability of Brain-Computer Interfaces: A Two-Stage International Cross-Sectional Survey.World neurosurgery · 2022Article
- Establishing a Clinical Brain-Computer Interface Program for Children With Severe Neurological Disabilities.Cureus · 2022Article
- Workshops of the Eighth International Brain-Computer Interface Meeting: BCIs: The Next Frontier.Brain computer interfaces (Abingdon, England) · 2022Article
- Brain-Computer Interfaces in Neurorecovery and Neurorehabilitation.Seminars in neurology · 2021Article
- KITE-BCI: A brain-computer interface system for functional electrical stimulation therapy.The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2021Article
- Advancing Brain-Computer Interface Applications for Severely Disabled Children Through a Multidisciplinary National Network: Summary of the Inaugural Pediatric BCI Canada Meeting.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIndividuals with severe neurological disabilities but preserved cognition, including children, are often precluded from connecting with their environments. Brain computer interfaces (BCI) are a potential solution where advancing technologies create new clinical opportunities. We evaluated clinician awareness as a modifiable barrier to progress and identified eligible populations.
methodsWe executed a national, population-based, cross-sectional survey of physician specialists caring for persons with severe disability. An evidence- and experience-based survey had three themes: clinician BCI knowledge, eligible populations, and potential impact. A BCI knowledge index was created and scored. Canadian adult and pediatric neurologists, physiatrists and a subset of developmental pediatricians were contacted. Secure, web-based software administered the survey via email with online data collection.
resultsOf 922 valid emails (664 neurologists, 253 physiatrists), 137 (15%) responded. One third estimated that ≥10% of their patients had severe neurological disability with cognitive capacity. BCI knowledge scores were low with > 40% identifying as less than "vaguely aware" and only 15% as "somewhat familiar" or better. Knowledge did not differ across specialties. Only 6 physicians (4%) had patients using BCI. Communication and wheelchair control rated highest for potentially improving quality of life. Most (81%) felt BCI had high potential to improve quality of life. Estimates suggested that > 13,000 Canadians (36 M population) might benefit from BCI technologies.
conclusionsDespite high potential and thousands of patients who might benefit, BCI awareness among clinicians caring for disabled persons is poor. Further, functional priorities for BCI applications may differ between medical professionals and potential BCI users, perhaps reflecting that clinicians possess a less accurate understanding of the desires and needs of potential end-users. Improving knowledge and engaging both clinicians and patients could facilitate BCI program development to improve patient outcomes.
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.