4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

A P300-based brain-computer interface: Initial tests by ALS patients

Journal

CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY
Volume 117, Issue 3, Pages 538-548

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2005.06.027

Keywords

amyotrophic lateral sclerosis; electroencephalogram; brain-computer interface; P300; event-related potentials; rehabilitation

Funding

  1. NIBIB NIH HHS [EB00856] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NICHD NIH HHS [HD30146] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: The current study evaluates the effectiveness of a brain-computer interface (BCI) system that operates by detecting a P300 elicited by one of four randomly presented stimuli (i.e. YES, NO, PASS, END). Methods: Two groups of participants were tested. The first group included three amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) patients that varied in degree of disability, but all retained the ability to communicate; the second group included three non-ALS controls. Each participant participated in ten experimental sessions during a period of approximately 6 weeks. During each run the participant's task was to attend to one stimulus and disregard the other three. Stimuli were presented auditorily, visually, or in both modes. Results: Two of the 3 ALS patient's classification rates were equal to those achieved by the non-ALS participants. Waveform morphology varied as a function of the presentation mode, but not in a similar pattern for each participant. Conclusions: The event-related potentials elicited by the target stimuli could be discriminated from the non-target stimuli for the non-ALS and the ALS groups. Future studies will begin to examine online classification. Significance: The results of offline classification suggest that a P300-based BCI can serve as a non-muscular communication device in both ALS, and non-ALS control groups. (c) 2005 International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available