Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42447184›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

Subject-independent EEG classification of imagined swallowing: Impact of saliva vs. water paradigms.

Sevgi Gökçe Aslan, Bülent Yılmaz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Sevgi Gökçe AslanBiomedical Engineering Department, Inonu University, Malatya, Türkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9425-1916
Bülent YılmazElectrical Engineering Department, Gulf University for Science and Technology (GUST), Hawally, Kuwait.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dysphagia poses a significant burden on global health, necessitating innovative neurorehabilitation tools. Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCIs) based on motor imagery offer a promising avenue, yet the neural differentiation between distinct swallowing paradigms remains under-explored. This study investigates the electrophysiological characteristics of imagined swallowing to establish a robust, subject-independent framework for neural decoding. We recorded EEG signals from 30 participants across two experimental paradigms: imagined saliva and imagined water swallowing. A rigorous analytical pipeline was implemented, featuring artifact removal, multidimensional feature extraction, and fold-wise statistical feature selection utilizing False Discovery Rate (FDR) correction and effect size criteria. To ensure the clinical translatability of the findings, a Leave-One-Subject-Out (LOSO) cross-validation scheme and permutation testing were employed for classification and statistical validation. Our findings demonstrate that EEG-based features can distinguish rest from imagined swallowing with near-ceiling performance (~99% accuracy), regardless of the paradigm. While the discrimination between imagined saliva and water yielded moderate accuracy (~63%), the results reveal critical insights into the inherent neural similarities of these motor imagery tasks. This study provides a statistically validated, subject-independent benchmark for decoding swallowing intentions. The high classification performance underlines the feasibility of EEG-based BCIs for dysphagia rehabilitation. While established as a proof-of-concept in healthy individuals, this framework paves the way for future neurofeedback applications in clinical populations.

Indexed as

DeglutitionElectroencephalographyImaginationSalivaAdultBrain-Computer InterfacesFemaleHumansMaleWaterYoung AdultWater

Identifiers

PMID42447184
PMCPMC13367685

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.