ArticleBiosensors2022
Decoding of Turning Intention during Walking Based on EEG Biomarkers.
Article in Biosensors, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The classification of walking and phases of gait using EEG: a scoping review.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Biosensors in Rehabilitation and Assistance Robotics.Biosensors · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In the EEG literature, there is a lack of asynchronous intention models that realistically propose interfaces for applications that must operate in real time. In this work, a novel BMI approach to detect in real time the intention to turn is proposed. For this purpose, an offline, pseudo-online and online analysis is presented to validate the EEG as a biomarker for the intention to turn. This article presents a methodology for the creation of a BMI that could differentiate two classes: monotonous walk and intention to turn. A comparison of some of the most popular algorithms in the literature is conducted. To filter the signal, two relevant algorithms are used: H∞ filter and ASR. For processing and classification, the mean of the covariance matrices in the Riemannian space was calculated and then, with various classifiers of different types, the distance of the test samples to each class in the Riemannian space was estimated. This dispenses with power-based models and the necessary baseline correction, which is a problem in realistic scenarios. In the cross-validation for a generic selection (valid for any subject) and a personalized one, the results were, on average, 66.2% and 69.6% with the best filter H∞. For the pseudo-online, the custom configuration for each subject was an average of 40.2% TP and 9.3 FP/min; the best subject obtained 43.9% TP and 2.9 FP/min. In the final validation test, this subject obtained 2.5 FP/min and an accuracy rate of 71.43%, and the turn anticipation was 0.21 s on average.
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.