ArticleFrontiers in computational neuroscience2020
Performance Analysis With Different Types of Visual Stimuli in a BCI-Based Speller Under an RSVP Paradigm.
Article in Frontiers in computational neuroscience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Brain Signal for Secure EEG Biometric Authentication: A Comprehensive Survey.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Evaluation of Different Types of Stimuli in an Event-Related Potential-Based Brain-Computer Interface Speller under Rapid Serial Visual Presentation.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Brain-computer interfaces and human factors: the role of language and cultural differences-Still a missing gap?Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2024Article
- [Research progress of brain-computer interface application paradigms based on rapid serial visual presentation].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2023Article
- Evaluation of Single-Trial Classification to Control a Visual ERP-BCI under a Situation Awareness Scenario.Brain sciences · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Brain-Computer Interface (BCI) systems enable an alternative communication channel for severely-motor disabled patients to interact with their environment using no muscular movements. In recent years, the importance of research into non-gaze dependent brain-computer interface paradigms has been increasing, in contrast to the most frequently studied BCI-based speller paradigm (i.e., row-column presentation, RCP). Several visual modifications that have already been validated under the RCP paradigm for communication purposes have not been validated under the most extended non-gaze dependent rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) paradigm. Thus, in the present study, three different sets of stimuli were assessed under RSVP, with the following communication features: white letters (WL), famous faces (FF), neutral pictures (NP). Eleven healthy subjects participated in this experiment, in which the subjects had to go through a calibration phase, an online phase and, finally, a subjective questionnaire completion phase. The results showed that the FF and NP stimuli promoted better performance in the calibration and online phases, being slightly better in the FF paradigm. Regarding the subjective questionnaires, again both FF and NP were preferred by the participants in contrast to the WL stimuli, but this time the NP stimuli scored slightly higher. These findings suggest that the use of FF and NP for RSVP-based spellers could be beneficial to increase information transfer rate in comparison to the most frequently used letter-based stimuli and could represent a promising communication system for individuals with altered ocular-motor function.
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.