ArticleExperimental brain research2025
Quantifying and evaluating motor imagery ability using EEG microstates in MI-BCI training.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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) based on motor imagery (MI) demonstrate significant potential in device control, gaming, and clinical rehabilitation. However, due to various factors, the successful implementation of the MI-BCI system is not a straightforward process, and many subjects fail to effectively operate the system as expected. To avoid additional training for these subjects, accurate assessment and prediction of MI ability are crucial for adjusting training strategies. To this end, our study investigates the neuroelectrophysiological correlates of MI ability, aiming to establish a multivariate linear evaluation model utilizing electroencephalogram (EEG) microstate parameters that directly reflect cortical dynamics. We collected and analyzed data from 18 participants, identifying possible evaluation factors through correlations between microstate parameters and both classification accuracy and event-related desynchronization (ERD) power characteristics. The results showed that the differences between the subjects were closely related to their sensorimotor ability, attention, and cognitive ability. The established evaluation model exhibited robust assessment accuracy (R2 = 0.77, p < 0.001, MAE = 5.65) even when utilizing limited experimental data (20 trials). Taken together, the microstate-based evaluation approach in this study offers a new perspective on understanding and analyzing the causes of MI ability differences, which can help identify users suitable for BCI systems and promote subsequent personalized training, application promotion, and development.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40996498What 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.