<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jeremy Jeremy Hill</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ricci, Erin</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Haider, Sameah</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">McCane, Lynn M</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Susan M Heckman</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jonathan Wolpaw</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Theresa M Vaughan</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">A practical, intuitive brain-computer interface for communicating 'yes' or 'no' by listening.</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">J Neural Eng</style></secondary-title><alt-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">J Neural Eng</style></alt-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Adult</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Aged</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Algorithms</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Auditory Perception</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">brain-computer interfaces</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Communication Aids for Disabled</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Electroencephalography</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Equipment Design</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Equipment Failure Analysis</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Female</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Humans</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Male</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Man-Machine Systems</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Middle Aged</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Quadriplegia</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Treatment Outcome</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">User-Computer Interface</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2014</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">06/2014</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24838278</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">11</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">035003</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">OBJECTIVE:
Previous work has shown that it is possible to build an EEG-based binary brain-computer interface system (BCI) driven purely by shifts of attention to auditory stimuli. However, previous studies used abrupt, abstract stimuli that are often perceived as harsh and unpleasant, and whose lack of inherent meaning may make the interface unintuitive and difficult for beginners. We aimed to establish whether we could transition to a system based on more natural, intuitive stimuli (spoken words 'yes' and 'no') without loss of performance, and whether the system could be used by people in the locked-in state.
APPROACH:
We performed a counterbalanced, interleaved within-subject comparison between an auditory streaming BCI that used beep stimuli, and one that used word stimuli. Fourteen healthy volunteers performed two sessions each, on separate days. We also collected preliminary data from two subjects with advanced amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), who used the word-based system to answer a set of simple yes-no questions.
MAIN RESULTS:
The N1, N2 and P3 event-related potentials elicited by words varied more between subjects than those elicited by beeps. However, the difference between responses to attended and unattended stimuli was more consistent with words than beeps. Healthy subjects' performance with word stimuli (mean 77% ± 3.3 s.e.) was slightly but not significantly better than their performance with beep stimuli (mean 73% ± 2.8 s.e.). The two subjects with ALS used the word-based BCI to answer questions with a level of accuracy similar to that of the healthy subjects.
SIGNIFICANCE:
Since performance using word stimuli was at least as good as performance using beeps, we recommend that auditory streaming BCI systems be built with word stimuli to make the system more pleasant and intuitive. Our preliminary data show that word-based streaming BCI is a promising tool for communication by people who are locked in.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">3</style></issue></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>5</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Hinterberger, T.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Nijboer, F</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Kübler, A.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Matuz, T.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Adrian Furdea</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mochty, Ursula</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jordan, M.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Lal, T.N</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jeremy Jeremy Hill</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mellinger, Jürgen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Bensch, M</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tangermann, Michael</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Widmann, G.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Elger, Christian</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Rosenstiel, W.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Schölkopf, B</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Niels Birbaumer</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Brain Computer Interfaces for Communication in Paralysis: a Clinical-Experimental Approach.</style></title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">brain-computer interfaces</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">EEG</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">experiment</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Medical sciences Medicine</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">paralyzed patients</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">slow cortical potentials</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Thought-Translation Device</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2007</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://psydok.sulb.uni-saarland.de/volltexte/2008/2154/</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Virtual Library of Psychology at Saarland University and State Library, GERMANY, PsyDok [http://psydok.sulb.uni-saarland.de/phpoai/oai2.php] (Germany)</style></publisher><isbn><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">9780262256049</style></isbn><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color: #333333; font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 24px;&quot;&gt;An overview of different approaches to brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) developed in our laboratory is given. An important clinical application of BCIs is to enable communication or environmental control in severely paralyzed patients. The BCI “Thought-Translation Device (TTD)” allows verbal communication through the voluntary self-regulation of brain signals (e.g., slow cortical potentials (SCPs)), which is achieved by operant feedback training. Humans' ability to self-regulate their SCPs is used to move a cursor toward a target that contains a selectable letter set. Two different approaches were followed to developWeb browsers that could be controlled with binary brain responses. Implementing more powerful classification methods including different signal parameters such as oscillatory features improved our BCI considerably. It was also tested on signals with implanted electrodes. Most BCIs provide the user with a visual feedback interface. Visually impaired patients require an auditory feedback mode. A procedure using auditory (sonified) feedback of multiple EEG parameters was evaluated. Properties of the auditory systems are reported and the results of two experiments with auditory feedback are presented. Clinical data of eight ALS patients demonstrated that all patients were able to acquire efficient brain control of one of the three available BCI systems (SCP, µ-rhythm, and P300), most of them used the SCP-BCI. A controlled comparison of the three systems in a group of ALS patients, however, showed that P300-BCI and the µ-BCI are faster and more easily acquired than SCP-BCI, at least in patients with some rudimentary motor control left. Six patients who started BCI training after entering the completely locked-in state did not achieve reliable communication skills with any BCI system. One completely locked-in patient was able t o communicate shortly with a ph-meter, but lost control afterward.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract></record></records></xml>