<?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%">McCane, Lynn M</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Sellers, Eric W</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Dennis J. McFarland</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mak, Joseph N</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Carmack, C Steve</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Zeitlin, Debra</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%">Brain-computer interface (BCI) evaluation in people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Amyotroph Lateral Scler Frontotemporal Degener</style></secondary-title><alt-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Amyotroph Lateral Scler Frontotemporal Degener</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%">Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Biofeedback, Psychology</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">brain-computer interfaces</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Communication Disorders</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Electroencephalography</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Event-Related Potentials, P300</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%">Middle Aged</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Online Systems</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Photic Stimulation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Psychomotor Performance</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Reaction Time</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/24555843</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">15</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">207-15</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) might restore communication to people severely disabled by amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) or other disorders. We sought to: 1) define a protocol for determining whether a person with ALS can use a visual P300-based BCI; 2) determine what proportion of this population can use the BCI; and 3) identify factors affecting BCI performance. Twenty-five individuals with ALS completed an evaluation protocol using a standard 6 × 6 matrix and parameters selected by stepwise linear discrimination. With an 8-channel EEG montage, the subjects fell into two groups in BCI accuracy (chance accuracy 3%). Seventeen averaged 92 (± 3)% (range 71-100%), which is adequate for communication (G70 group). Eight averaged 12 (± 6)% (range 0-36%), inadequate for communication (L40 subject group). Performance did not correlate with disability: 11/17 (65%) of G70 subjects were severely disabled (i.e. ALSFRS-R &lt; 5). All L40 subjects had visual impairments (e.g. nystagmus, diplopia, ptosis). P300 was larger and more anterior in G70 subjects. A 16-channel montage did not significantly improve accuracy. In conclusion, most people severely disabled by ALS could use a visual P300-based BCI for communication. In those who could not, visual impairment was the principal obstacle. For these individuals, auditory P300-based BCIs might be effective.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">3-4</style></issue></record></records></xml>