SynthesisFrontiers in human neuroscience2022
A systematic review of research on augmentative and alternative communication brain-computer interface systems for individuals with disabilities.
Synthesis in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Influence of age, cognitive function, attention, and mental state on the effectiveness of EEG-based brain-computer interface device use: a systematic review.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Pooled it
- Clinical practice guideline: Interventions for Developmental Language Delay and Disorders.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2024Guideline
- Comparison of Point-and-Click Performance Between the Brainfingers BCI and the Mouse.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Identifying P300 brain-computer interface training strategies for AAC in children: a focus group study.Augmentative and alternative communication (Baltimore, Md. : 1985) · 2026Review
- Considering whether brain-computer interfaces have prospective potential to support children who have the physical abilities for touch-based AAC access: a forum manuscript.Augmentative and alternative communication (Baltimore, Md. : 1985) · 2026Article
- Market shaping via digital public infrastructure for assistive technology in low- and middle-income countries.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2026Article
- Visual ERP-based brain-computer interface use with severe physical, speech and eye movement impairments: case studies.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Supporting effective alternative access for individuals with physical disabilities: state of the science, emerging technologies, and future research directions.Augmentative and alternative communication (Baltimore, Md. : 1985) · 2025Review
- Process evaluation of a complex intervention in augmentative and alternative communication care in Germany: a mixed methods study.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- RSVP keyboard with inquiry preview: mixed performance and user experience with an adaptive, multimodal typing interface combining EEG and switch input.Journal of neural engineering · 2025Article
- Imagining alternative futures with augmentative and alternative communication: a manifesto.Medical humanities · 2025Article
- Artifact filtering application to increase online parity in a communication BCI: progress toward use in daily-life.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Article
- Article
- What stakeholders with neurodegenerative conditions value about speech and accuracy in development of BCI systems for communication.Brain computer interfaces (Abingdon, England) · 2024Article
- Physiological Correlates of Hypnotizability: Hypnotic Behaviour and Prognostic Role in Medicine.Brain sciences · 2023Review
- A brain-computer typing interface using finger movements.International IEEE/EMBS Conference on Neural Engineering : [proceedings]. International IEEE EMBS Conference on Neural Engineering · 2023Article
- Identifying Thematics in a Brain-Computer Interface Research.Computational intelligence and neuroscience · 2023Review
- Bringing the Computer-Based Instrument for Low Motor Language Testing to Canada: A Survey of Caregiver and Clinician Perspectives.International journal of language & communication disordersArticle
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Augmentative and alternative communication brain-computer interface (AAC-BCI) systems are intended to offer communication access to people with severe speech and physical impairment (SSPI) without requiring volitional movement. As the field moves toward clinical implementation of AAC-BCI systems, research involving participants with SSPI is essential. Research has demonstrated variability in AAC-BCI system performance across users, and mixed results for comparisons of performance for users with and without disabilities. The aims of this systematic review were to (1) describe study, system, and participant characteristics reported in BCI research, (2) summarize the communication task performance of participants with disabilities using AAC-BCI systems, and (3) explore any differences in performance for participants with and without disabilities. Electronic databases were searched in May, 2018, and March, 2021, identifying 6065 records, of which 73 met inclusion criteria. Non-experimental study designs were common and sample sizes were typically small, with approximately half of studies involving five or fewer participants with disabilities. There was considerable variability in participant characteristics, and in how those characteristics were reported. Over 60% of studies reported an average selection accuracy ≤70% for participants with disabilities in at least one tested condition. However, some studies excluded participants who did not reach a specific system performance criterion, and others did not state whether any participants were excluded based on performance. Twenty-nine studies included participants both with and without disabilities, but few reported statistical analyses comparing performance between the two groups. Results suggest that AAC-BCI systems show promise for supporting communication for people with SSPI, but they remain ineffective for some individuals. The lack of standards in reporting outcome measures makes it difficult to synthesize data across studies. Further research is needed to demonstrate efficacy of AAC-BCI systems for people who experience SSPI of varying etiologies and severity levels, and these individuals should be included in system design and testing. Consensus in terminology and consistent participant, protocol, and performance description will facilitate the exploration of user and system characteristics that positively or negatively affect AAC-BCI use, and support innovations that will make this technology more useful to a broader group of people. Clinical trial registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42018095345, PROSPERO: CRD42018095345.
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.