Back

Outcome measures in implantable brain-computer interface research: a systematic review

Dohle, E.; Swan, E.; Yusuf, S.; Jovanovic, L.; Thompson, L.; Layard Horsfall, H.; Muirhead, W. R.; Bashford, L.; Brannigan, J.

2024-10-16 neurology
10.1101/2024.10.15.24315534 medRxiv
Show abstract

Implantable brain-computer interfaces (iBCIs) aim to restore function in patients with severe motor impairments by translating neural signals into motor outputs. As iBCI technology advances toward clinical application, assessing iBCI performance with robust and clinically relevant outcome measures becomes crucial. This systematic review analysed 77 studies, with 63.6% reporting outcome measures prospectively. Decoding outcomes were most frequently assessed (67.5%), followed by task performance (63.6%). Only 22.1% of studies reported a clinical outcome measure, often related to prosthetic limb function or activities of daily living. Successful iBCI translation and regulatory approval requires clinical outcomes developed collaboratively with individuals with motor impairments. One Sentence SummaryImplantable brain-computer interface studies primarily evaluate engineering-related outcome measures over clinical outcome measures.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.