ArticleAPL bioengineering2024
Decoding electroencephalographic responses to visual stimuli compatible with electrical stimulation.
Article in APL bioengineering, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enhancing User Experience in Virtual Reality Through Optical Flow Simplification with the Help of Physiological Measurements: Pilot Study.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Optimization frameworks for bespoke sensory encoding in neuroprosthetics.APL bioengineering · 2025Article
- Review of brain-computer interface technology in ophthalmology: Current status, challenges and future directions.Advances in ophthalmology practice and researchReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Electrical stimulation of the visual nervous system could improve the quality of life of patients affected by acquired blindness by restoring some visual sensations, but requires careful optimization of stimulation parameters to produce useful perceptions. Neural correlates of elicited perceptions could be used for fast automatic optimization, with electroencephalography as a natural choice as it can be acquired non-invasively. Nonetheless, its low signal-to-noise ratio may hinder discrimination of similar visual patterns, preventing its use in the optimization of electrical stimulation. Our work investigates for the first time the discriminability of the electroencephalographic responses to visual stimuli compatible with electrical stimulation, employing a newly acquired dataset whose stimuli encompass the concurrent variation of several features, while neuroscience research tends to study the neural correlates of single visual features. We then performed above-chance single-trial decoding of multiple features of our newly crafted visual stimuli using relatively simple machine learning algorithms. A decoding scheme employing the information from multiple stimulus presentations was implemented, substantially improving our decoding performance, suggesting that such methods should be used systematically in future applications. The significance of the present work relies in the determination of which visual features can be decoded from electroencephalographic responses to electrical stimulation-compatible stimuli and at which granularity they can be discriminated. Our methods pave the way to using electroencephalographic correlates to optimize electrical stimulation parameters, thus increasing the effectiveness of current visual neuroprostheses.
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.