ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2026
Brain responses to different action observation paradigms and assessing transferable cross-paradigm decoding.
Article in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAction observation-based brain-computer interface (AO-BCI) is a novel technology for stroke rehabilitation. Since various AO paradigms are employed in the rehabilitation of different limb movements, a limited training dataset can compromise recognition accuracy. Thus, this study aimed to analyze the brain responses to various AO paradigms systematically and assess the BCI recognition performance across AO paradigms for the first time.
methodsOn the basis of a frame rate reduction method, three AO paradigms, each containing four actions, were designed: the right-hand task-driven (RHTD) paradigm, the right-hand non-task-driven (RHNTD) paradigm, and the left-hand task-driven (LHTD) paradigm. EEG data were collected from 19 participants under the visual feedback condition and the soft robotic glove feedback condition. Task discriminative component analysis (TDCA) was utilized to perform online target detection. EEG responses were analyzed. Moreover, four training schemes, including target session (TS) data, source session data, a combination and transfer with least squares transformation, were developed to construct spatial filters in TDCA to assess the transferability of cross-paradigm decoding in AO-BCI.
resultsThe three designed AO paradigms elicited steady state motion visual evoke potentials (SSMVEP) in the occipital cortex and induced event-related desynchronization (ERD) in the sensorimotor cortex. The RHTD paradigm induced stronger ERD than the other two paradigms. In addition to EEG responses, the recognition accuracy of the SSMVEP under the RHNTD paradigm (85.20%) was significantly greater than that under the RHTD paradigm (72.37%) and the LHTD paradigm (77.50%). Furthermore, when combing EEG from the mirrored stimulus and TS data, the recognition accuracy increased to 77.50% (RHTD) and 80% (LHTD) respectively. However, when EEG data from observing the AO paradigm, whether task-driven or not, were directly used for training or combed with TS data, the recognition accuracy decreased.
conclusionThis study revealed that the content of AO paradigms affects the amplitude of the evoked SSMVEP and ERD. Furthermore, EEG data elicited by the mirrored stimulus can be directly utilized in cross-paradigm training to increase recognition accuracy, whereas data from observing paradigms involving task-driven or not require further development of calibration methods to be effectively applied in cross-paradigm decoding.
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.