Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39338748›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Detection of Movement-Related Brain Activity Associated with Hand and Tongue Movements from Single-Trial Around-Ear EEG.

Dávid Gulyás, Mads Jochumsen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

2 authors.

Dávid GulyásDepartment of Health Science and Technology, Aalborg University, 9260 Gistrup, Denmark.ORCID 0009-0005-1455-0905
Mads JochumsenDepartment of Health Science and Technology, Aalborg University, 9260 Gistrup, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0001-7729-4359

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Movement intentions of motor impaired individuals can be detected in laboratory settings via electroencephalography Brain-Computer Interfaces (EEG-BCIs) and used for motor rehabilitation and external system control. The real-world BCI use is limited by the costly, time-consuming, obtrusive, and uncomfortable setup of scalp EEG. Ear-EEG offers a faster, more convenient, and more aesthetic setup for recording EEG, but previous work using expensive amplifiers detected motor intentions at chance level. This study investigates the feasibility of a low-cost ear-EEG BCI for the detection of tongue and hand movements for rehabilitation and control purposes. In this study, ten able-bodied participants performed 100 right wrist extensions and 100 tongue-palate movements while three channels of EEG were recorded around the left ear. Offline movement vs. idle activity classification of ear-EEG was performed using temporal and spectral features classified with Random Forest, Support Vector Machine, K-Nearest Neighbours, and Linear Discriminant Analysis in three scenarios: Hand (rehabilitation purpose), hand (control purpose), and tongue (control purpose). The classification accuracies reached 70%, 73%, and 83%, respectively, which was significantly higher than chance level. These results suggest that a low-cost ear-EEG BCI can detect movement intentions for rehabilitation and control purposes. Future studies should include online BCI use with the intended user group in real-life settings.

Indexed as

Brain-Computer InterfacesElectroencephalographyHandMovementTongueAdultBrainEarFemaleHumansMaleSupport Vector MachineYoung Adultbrain–computer interfaceear-EEGhandmovement intentionmovement-related cortical potentialssensorimotor rhythmtongue

Identifiers

PMID39338748
PMCPMC11436153

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.