Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40816265›Full record

ArticleCell2025

Inner speech in motor cortex and implications for speech neuroprostheses.

Erin M Kunz, Benyamin Abramovich Krasa, Foram Kamdar, Donald T Avansino, Nick Hahn, Seonghyun Yoon, Akansha Singh, Samuel R Nason-Tomaszewski, Nicholas S Card, Justin J Jude and 13 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cell, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. In conversation with Sergey Stavisky.Nature neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. In conversation with Richard Andersen.Nature neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Temporally structured motor and auditory representations in covert syllable production.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Safeguarding Neural Data.Neurology · 2026
    Review
  11. Premotor cortex uses a compositional neural geometry to plan words.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  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

23 authors.

Erin M KunzDepartment of Electrical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA; Wu Tsai Neurosciences Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA. Electronic address: ekunz@stanford.edu.
Benyamin Abramovich KrasaNeuroscience Graduate Program, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Foram KamdarDepartment of Neurosurgery, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Donald T AvansinoDepartment of Neurosurgery, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA; Howard Hughes Medical Institute at Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Nick HahnDepartment of Neurosurgery, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Seonghyun YoonDepartment of Electrical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA; Department of Mathematics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Akansha SinghDepartment of Neurosurgery, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Samuel R Nason-TomaszewskiWallace H. Coulter Department of Biomedical Engineering, Emory University and Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Nicholas S CardDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA, USA.
Justin J JudeCenter for Neurotechnology and Neurorecovery, Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Brandon G JacquesWallace H. Coulter Department of Biomedical Engineering, Emory University and Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Payton H BechefskyWallace H. Coulter Department of Biomedical Engineering, Emory University and Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Carrina IacobacciDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA, USA.
Leigh R HochbergSchool of Engineering and Carney Institute for Brain Sciences, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA; VA Center for Neurorestoration and Neurotechnology, Office of Research and Development, VA Providence, Healthcare System, Providence, RI, USA; Center for Neurotechnology and Neurorecovery, Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Daniel B RubinCenter for Neurotechnology and Neurorecovery, Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Ziv M WilliamsDepartment of Neurosurgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Harvard-MIT Division of Health Sciences and Technology, Boston, MA, USA; Program in Neuroscience, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
David M BrandmanDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA, USA.
Sergey D StaviskyDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA, USA.
Nicholas AuYongWallace H. Coulter Department of Biomedical Engineering, Emory University and Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA; Department of Neurosurgery, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA; Department of Cell Biology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Chethan PandarinathWallace H. Coulter Department of Biomedical Engineering, Emory University and Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA; Department of Neurosurgery, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Shaul DruckmannDepartment of Electrical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA; Department of Neurobiology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Jaimie M HendersonWu Tsai Neurosciences Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA; Department of Neurosurgery, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Francis R WillettDepartment of Neurosurgery, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA; Howard Hughes Medical Institute at Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

Funding

Single-neuron population dynamics in human speech motor cortex for a speech prosthesisU01DC019430 · NIDCD · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI Shaul Druckmann, JAIMIE M HENDERSON · 2021 to 2026
$4.5M
Intuitive, complete neural control of tablet computers for communicationU01DC017844 · NIDCD · BROWN UNIVERSITY · PI HOCHBERG, LEIGH R · 2019 to 2025
$4.3M
Fusing motor neuroscience and artificial intelligence to create next-generation neural prostheses.DP2NS127291 · NINDS · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI PANDARINATH, CHETHAN · 2021 to 2024
$2.4M
Understanding and restoring speech production using an intracortical brain-computer interfaceDP2DC021055 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI STAVISKY, SERGEY · 2022 to 2025
$2.3M
Neural control of speech generation in human motor cortexK23DC021297 · NIDCD · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI DANIEL B RUBIN · 2023 to 2026
$786k
Restoring Dexterous Hand Function with Artificial Neural Network-Based Brain-Computer InterfacesF32HD112173 · NICHD · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI NASON-TOMASZEWSKI, SAMUEL ROSS · 2023 to 2025
$221k
Howard Hughes Medical InstituteNICHD NIH HHS F32 HD112173NIDCD NIH HHS DP2 DC021055NIDCD NIH HHS K23 DC021297NIDCD NIH HHS U01 DC017844NIDCD NIH HHS U01 DC019430NINDS NIH HHS DP2 NS127291
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Speech brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) show promise in restoring communication to people with paralysis but have also prompted discussions regarding their potential to decode private inner speech. Separately, inner speech may be a way to bypass the current approach of requiring speech BCI users to physically attempt speech, which is fatiguing and can slow communication. Using multi-unit recordings from four participants, we found that inner speech is robustly represented in the motor cortex and that imagined sentences can be decoded in real time. The representation of inner speech was highly correlated with attempted speech, though we also identified a neural "motor-intent" dimension that differentiates the two. We investigated the possibility of decoding private inner speech and found that some aspects of free-form inner speech could be decoded during sequence recall and counting tasks. Finally, we demonstrate high-fidelity strategies that prevent speech BCIs from unintentionally decoding private inner speech.

Indexed as

Brain-Computer InterfacesMotor CortexSpeechAdultFemaleHumansMaleNeural ProsthesesYoung Adultbrain-computer interfacecovert speechinner speechmotor cortexspeech neuroprosthesis

Identifiers

PMID40816265
PMCPMC12360486

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.