Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36726556›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in computational neuroscience2022

Status of deep learning for EEG-based brain-computer interface applications.

Khondoker Murad Hossain, Md Ariful Islam, Shahera Hossain, Anton Nijholt, Md Atiqur Rahman Ahad

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in computational neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. MountPat: investigations on the EEG signals.Cognitive neurodynamics · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. [Technical maturity and bubble risks of brain-computer interface (BCI): Considerations from research to industrial translation].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2025
    Article
  11. Brain-Computer Interfaces for Stroke Motor Rehabilitation.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Khondoker Murad HossainDepartment of Computer Science and Electrical Engineering, University of Maryland Baltimore County, Baltimore, MD, United States.
Md Ariful IslamDepartment of Robotics and Mechatronics Engineering, University of Dhaka, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Shahera HossainKyushu Institute of Technology, Kitakyushu, Japan.
Anton NijholtHuman Media Interaction, University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands.
Md Atiqur Rahman AhadDepartment of Computer Science and Digital Technology, University of East London, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the previous decade, breakthroughs in the central nervous system bioinformatics and computational innovation have prompted significant developments in brain-computer interface (BCI), elevating it to the forefront of applied science and research. BCI revitalization enables neurorehabilitation strategies for physically disabled patients (e.g., disabled patients and hemiplegia) and patients with brain injury (e.g., patients with stroke). Different methods have been developed for electroencephalogram (EEG)-based BCI applications. Due to the lack of a large set of EEG data, methods using matrix factorization and machine learning were the most popular. However, things have changed recently because a number of large, high-quality EEG datasets are now being made public and used in deep learning-based BCI applications. On the other hand, deep learning is demonstrating great prospects for solving complex relevant tasks such as motor imagery classification, epileptic seizure detection, and driver attention recognition using EEG data. Researchers are doing a lot of work on deep learning-based approaches in the BCI field right now. Moreover, there is a great demand for a study that emphasizes only deep learning models for EEG-based BCI applications. Therefore, we introduce this study to the recent proposed deep learning-based approaches in BCI using EEG data (from 2017 to 2022). The main differences, such as merits, drawbacks, and applications are introduced. Furthermore, we point out current challenges and the directions for future studies. We argue that this review study will help the EEG research community in their future research.

Indexed as

BCIconvolutional neural network (CNN)deep learningEEGfuture challenge

Identifiers

PMID36726556
PMCPMC9885375

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.