ArticleBrain sciences2024
Evaluation of Different Visual Feedback Methods for Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCI) Based on Code-Modulated Visual Evoked Potentials (cVEP).
Article in Brain sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rethinking Brain-Computer Interfaces for Soft Robotic Systems: A Unified Framework and Perspective.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Brain-computer interface: an update for the clinicians.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2026Review
- Article
- Streamlining cVEP Paradigms: Effects of a Minimized Electrode Montage on Brain-Computer Interface Performance.Brain sciences · 2025Article
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
Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) enable direct communication between the brain and external devices using electroencephalography (EEG) signals. BCIs based on code-modulated visual evoked potentials (cVEPs) are based on visual stimuli, thus appropriate visual feedback on the interface is crucial for an effective BCI system. Many previous studies have demonstrated that implementing visual feedback can improve information transfer rate (ITR) and reduce fatigue. This research compares a dynamic interface, where target boxes change their sizes based on detection certainty, with a threshold bar interface in a three-step cVEP speller. In this study, we found that both interfaces perform well, with slight variations in accuracy, ITR, and output characters per minute (OCM). Notably, some participants showed significant performance improvements with the dynamic interface and found it less distracting compared to the threshold bars. These results suggest that while average performance metrics are similar, the dynamic interface can provide significant benefits for certain users. This study underscores the potential for personalized interface choices to enhance BCI user experience and performance. By improving user friendliness, performance, and reducing distraction, dynamic visual feedback could optimize BCI technology for a broader range of users.
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.