Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33034634›Full record

ArticleGigaScience2020

Multimodal signal dataset for 11 intuitive movement tasks from single upper extremity during multiple recording sessions.

Ji-Hoon Jeong, Jeong-Hyun Cho, Kyung-Hwan Shim, Byoung-Hee Kwon, Byeong-Hoo Lee, Do-Yeun Lee, Dae-Hyeok Lee, Seong-Whan Lee

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in GigaScience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 71 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Ji-Hoon JeongDepartment of Brain and Cognitive Engineering, Korea University, 145 Anam-ro, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul 02841, South Korea.
Jeong-Hyun ChoDepartment of Brain and Cognitive Engineering, Korea University, 145 Anam-ro, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul 02841, South Korea.
Kyung-Hwan ShimDepartment of Brain and Cognitive Engineering, Korea University, 145 Anam-ro, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul 02841, South Korea.
Byoung-Hee KwonDepartment of Brain and Cognitive Engineering, Korea University, 145 Anam-ro, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul 02841, South Korea.
Byeong-Hoo LeeDepartment of Brain and Cognitive Engineering, Korea University, 145 Anam-ro, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul 02841, South Korea.
Do-Yeun LeeDepartment of Brain and Cognitive Engineering, Korea University, 145 Anam-ro, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul 02841, South Korea.
Dae-Hyeok LeeDepartment of Brain and Cognitive Engineering, Korea University, 145 Anam-ro, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul 02841, South Korea.
Seong-Whan LeeDepartment of Brain and Cognitive Engineering, Korea University, 145 Anam-ro, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul 02841, South Korea.
Korea University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNon-invasive brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) have been developed for realizing natural bi-directional interaction between users and external robotic systems. However, the communication between users and BCI systems through artificial matching is a critical issue. Recently, BCIs have been developed to adopt intuitive decoding, which is the key to solving several problems such as a small number of classes and manually matching BCI commands with device control. Unfortunately, the advances in this area have been slow owing to the lack of large and uniform datasets. This study provides a large intuitive dataset for 11 different upper extremity movement tasks obtained during multiple recording sessions. The dataset includes 60-channel electroencephalography, 7-channel electromyography, and 4-channel electro-oculography of 25 healthy participants collected over 3-day sessions for a total of 82,500 trials across all the participants.

findingsWe validated our dataset via neurophysiological analysis. We observed clear sensorimotor de-/activation and spatial distribution related to real-movement and motor imagery, respectively. Furthermore, we demonstrated the consistency of the dataset by evaluating the classification performance of each session using a baseline machine learning method.

conclusionsThe dataset includes the data of multiple recording sessions, various classes within the single upper extremity, and multimodal signals. This work can be used to (i) compare the brain activities associated with real movement and imagination, (ii) improve the decoding performance, and (iii) analyze the differences among recording sessions. Hence, this study, as a Data Note, has focused on collecting data required for further advances in the BCI technology.

Indexed as

Brain-Computer InterfacesElectroencephalographyHumansImaginationMovementUpper Extremitybrain–computer interfaceintuitive upper extremity movementsmultimodal signalsmultiple sessions

Identifiers

PMID33034634
PMCPMC7539536
OpenAlexW3092388469

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.