Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35891842›Full record

ArticleCureus2022

Establishing a Clinical Brain-Computer Interface Program for Children With Severe Neurological Disabilities.

Zeanna Jadavji, Ephrem Zewdie, Dion Kelly, Eli Kinney-Lang, Ion Robu, Adam Kirton

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. EEG-based sensorimotor neurofeedback for motor neurorehabilitation in children and adults: A scoping review.Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2024
    Article
  10. Fatigue in children using motor imagery and P300 brain-computer interfaces.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Grand challenges in pediatric stroke.Frontiers in stroke · 2023
    Article
  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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Zeanna JadavjiClinical Neuroscience, University of Calgary, Calgary, CAN.
Ephrem ZewdieClinical Neuroscience, University of Calgary, Calgary, CAN.
Dion KellyClinical Neuroscience, University of Calgary, Calgary, CAN.
Eli Kinney-LangClinical Neuroscience, University of Calgary, Calgary, CAN.
Ion RobuPhysical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Alberta Children's Hospital, Calgary, CAN.
Adam KirtonPediatrics, Clinical Neuroscience, University of Calgary, Calgary, CAN.
University of Calgary · CAAlberta Children's Hospital · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChildren with severe motor impairment but intact cognition are deprived of fundamental human rights. Quadriplegic cerebral palsy is the most common scenario where rehabilitation options remain limited. Brain-computer interfaces (BCI) represent a potential solution, but pediatric populations have been neglected. Direct engagement of children and families could provide meaningful opportunities while informing program development. We describe a patient-centered, clinical, non-invasive pediatric BCI program.

methodsEligible children were identified within a population-based, tertiary care children's hospital. Criteria included 1) age six to 18 years, 2) severe physical disability (non-ambulatory, minimal hand use), 3) severely limited speech, and 4) evidence of grade 1 cognitive capacity. After initial screening for BCI competency, participants attended regular sessions, attempting commercially available and customized systems to play computer games, control devices, and attempt communication.

resultsWe report the first 10 participants (median 11 years, range 6-16, 60% male). Over 334 hours of participation, there were no serious adverse events. BCI training was well tolerated, with favorable feedback from children and parents. All but one participant demonstrated the ability to perform BCI tasks. The majority performed well, using motor imagery based tasks for games and entertainment. Difficulties were most significant using P300, visual evoked potential based paradigms where maintenance of attention was challenging. Children and families expressed interest in continuing and informing program development.

conclusionsPatient-centered clinical BCI programs are feasible for children with severe disabilities. Carefully selected participants can often learn quickly to perform meaningful tasks on readily available systems. Patient and family motivation and engagement appear high.

Indexed as

brain computer interfacecerebral palsy typesclinical neuroscienceelectroencephalography (eeg)neuro-technologynon-verbal communicationperinatal stroke

Identifiers

PMID35891842
PMCPMC9307353
OpenAlexW4283363691

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.