ArticleBrain computer interfaces (Abingdon, England)2024
What stakeholders with neurodegenerative conditions value about speech and accuracy in development of BCI systems for communication.
Article in Brain computer interfaces (Abingdon, England), 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.
- MotiVE BCI: motivation models including valence and expectancy in brain-computer interface use.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2026Article
- 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
- How People Living With Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Use Personalized Automatic Speech Recognition Technology to Support Communication.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2024Article
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
Abstract
This research examined values of individuals with neurodegenerative conditions about features of speed and accuracy as they consider potential use of augmentative and alternative communication brain-computer interface systems (AAC-BCI). Sixty-six individuals with neurodegenerative disease responded to prompts about six hypothetical ethical vignettes. Data were analyzed with qualitative content analysis. The following themes emerged. (1) Disease progression may contribute to the trade-off between speed and accuracy with AAC-BCI systems. (2) Individual experiences with technology use inform their views about the speed-accuracy trade-off. (3) There is a range of views about how slow or inaccurate communication may impact relationships, the integrity of a message, and quality of life. (4) Design solutions are proposed to address trade-offs in AAC-BCI systems. With the rapid development of AAC-BCI systems, user-centered design must integrate values of potential end-users illustrating that context, partner, message, and environment impact the prioritization of speed or accuracy in any communication exchange.
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.