Trends in research participant categories and descriptions in abstracts from the International BCI Meeting series, 1999 to 2016

References

• Wolpaw JR, Birbaumer N, Heetderks WJ, et al. Brain-computer interface technology: a review of the first international meeting. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2000;8(2):164–173.
   Google Scholar
• Huggins JE, Müller-Putz G, Wolpaw JR (2017). The sixth International Brain–computer Interface Meeting: advances in basic and clinical research. Brain Comput Interfaces, 4: 1–2. DOI: 10.1080/2326263X.2017.1328211
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vaughan TM, Heetderks WJ, Trejo LJ, et al. Brain-computer interface technology: A review of the second International Meeting. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2003;11(2):94–109.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vaughan TM, Wolpaw JR. Special issue containing contributions from the fourth International Brain-Computer Interface Meeting. J Neural Eng. 2011;8(2). DOI:10.1088/1741-2560/8/2/020201
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huggins JE, Wolpaw JR. Papers from the fifth International Brain-Computer Interface Meeting. J Neural Eng. 2014;11(3). DOI:10.1088/1741-2560/11/3/030301
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vaughan TM, Wolpaw JR. The third International Meeting on brain-computer interface technology: making a difference. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2006;14(2):126–127.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Müller-Putz G, Huggins J, Steyrl D (Eds.). (2016). Proceedings of the 6th international brain-computer interface meeting: BCI past, present, and future. Verlag der Technischen Universität Graz. DOI: 10.3217/978-3-85125-467-9
   Google Scholar
• Kübler A, Holz E, Kaufmann T, et al. A user centred approach for bringing BCI controlled applications to end-users. In: Fazel-Rezai R, editor. Brain-Computer Interface Systems: recent progress and future prospects. 2013. DOI:10.5772/50696.
   Google Scholar
• Wolpaw JR, Wolpaw EW. Brain-Computer Interfaces: principles and Practice. Albany, NY: Oxford University Press; 2012. DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195388855.001.0001.
   Google Scholar
• Baykara E, Ruf CA, Fioravanti C, et al. Effects of training and motivation on auditory P300 brain–computer interface performance. Clin Neurophysiol. 2016;127(1):379–387.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Akram F, Han SM, Kim T-S. An efficient word typing P300-BCI system using a modified T9 interface and random forest classifier. Comput Biol Med. 2015;56:30–36.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hwang H-J, Lim J-H, Jung Y-J, et al. Development of an SSVEP-based BCI spelling system adopting a QWERTY-style LED keyboard. J Neurosci Methods. 2012;208(1):59–65.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nijboer F, Sellers EW, Mellinger J, et al. A P300-based brain–computer interface for people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Clin Neurophysiol. 2008;119(8):1909–1916.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• He Y, Eguren D, Azorin JM, et al. Brain-machine interfaces for controlling lower-limb powered robotic systems. J Neural Eng. 2018;15(2):021004.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moghimi S, Kushki A, Guerguerian AM, et al. A review of EEG-based brain-computer interfaces as access pathways for individuals with severe disabilities. Assistive Technol. 2013;25(2):99–110.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Monge-Pereira E, Ibanez-Pereda J, Alguacil-Diego IM, et al. Use of electroencephalography brain-computer interface systems as a rehabilitative approach for upper limb function after a stroke: A systematic review. PM&R. 2017;9(9):918–932.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carelli L, Solca F, Faini A, et al. (2017). Brain-computer interface for clinical purposes: cognitive assessment and rehabilitation. Biomed Res Int, 2017, 1695290.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Vaughan TM, McFarland DJ, Schalk G, et al. The Wadsworth BCI research and development program: at home with BCI. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2006;14(2):229–233.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oken BS, Orhan U, Roark B, et al. Brain–computer interface with language model–electroencephalography fusion for locked-in syndrome. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2014;28(4):387–394.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ikegami S, Takano K, Kondo K, et al. A region-based two-step P300-based brain–computer interface for patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Clin Neurophysiol. 2014;125(11):2305–2312.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaufmann T, Schulz SM, Köblitz A, et al. Face stimuli effectively prevent brain–computer interface inefficiency in patients with neurodegenerative disease. Clin Neurophysiol. 2013;124(5):893–900.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ikegami S, Takano K, Saeki N, et al. Operation of a P300-based brain–computer interface by individuals with cervical spinal cord injury. Clin Neurophysiol. 2011;122(5):991–996.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Severens M, Van der Waal M, Farquhar J, et al. Comparing tactile and visual gaze-independent brain–computer interfaces in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and healthy users. Clin Neurophysiol. 2014;125(11):2297–2304.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCane LM, Heckman SM, McFarland DJ, et al. P300-based brain-computer interface (BCI) event-related potentials (ERPs): people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) vs. age-matched controls. Clin Neurophysiol. 2015;126(11):2124–2131.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silvoni S, Konicar L, Prats-Sedano MA, et al. Tactile event-related potentials in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS): implications for brain-computer interface. Clin Neurophysiol. 2016;127(1):936–945.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kübler A, Holz EM, Riccio A, et al. The user-centered design as novel perspective for evaluating the usability of BCI-controlled applications. PLoS One. 2014;9(12):e112392.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kübler A. Brain-computer interfacing: science fiction has come true. Brain. 2013;136(6):2001–2004.
   Google Scholar
• Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, et al. Research electronic data capture (REDCap) – A metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42(2):377–381.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Middendorf M, McMillan G, Calhoun G, et al. Brain-computer interfaces based on the steady-state visual-evoked response. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2000;8(2):211–214.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen O, Koppel M, Malach R, et al. Controlling an avatar by thought using real-time fMRI. J Neural Eng. 2014;11(3):035006.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Penny WD, Roberts SJ, Curran EA, et al. EEG-based communication: a pattern recognition approach. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2000;8(2):214–215.
   Google Scholar
• Peters B, Bieker G, Heckman SM, et al. Brain-computer interface users speak up: the virtual users’ forum at the 2013 International Brain-Computer Interface Meeting. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015;96(3, Supplement):S33–S37.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riccio A, Holz EM, Aricò P, et al. Hybrid P300-based brain-computer interface to improve usability for people with severe motor disability: electromyographic signals for error correction during a spelling task. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015;96(3, Supplement):S54–S61.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ang KK, Guan C, Phua KS, et al. Facilitating effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on motor imagery brain-computer interface with robotic feedback for stroke rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015;96(3, Supplement):S79–S87.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hill K, Kovacs T, Shin S. Critical issues using brain-computer interfaces for augmentative and alternative communication. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015;96(3, Supplement):S8–S15.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. (n.d.). Reorganization and Plasticity to Accelerate Injury Recovery (REPAIR) (Archived). [ cited 2018 Oct 11]. Available from: https://www.darpa.mil/program/reorganization-and-plasticity-to-accelerate-injury-recovery
   Google Scholar
• Pineda JA, Allison BZ, Vankov A. The effects of self-movement, observation, and imagination on mu rhythms and readiness potentials (RP’s): toward a brain-computer interface (BCI). IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2000;8(2):219–222.
   Google Scholar
• Birbaumer N, Kübler A, Ghanayim N, et al. The thought translation device (TTD) for completely paralyzed patients. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2000;8(2):190–193.
   Google Scholar
• Kübler A, Holz EM, Sellers EW, et al. Toward independent home use of Brain-Computer Interfaces: a decision algorithm for selection of potential end-users. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015;96(3, Supplement):S27–S32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang H, Guan C, Chua KS, et al. Detection of motor imagery of swallow EEG signals based on the dual-tree complex wavelet transform and adaptive model selection. J Neural Eng. 2014;11(3):035016.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tukey JW (1958). Bias and confidence in not quite large samples. Anal Math Stat, 29, 614.
   Google Scholar
• Efron B (1982). The jackknife, the bootstrap, and other resampling plans. Presentation at the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, PA. DOI: 10.1137/1.9781611970319
   Google Scholar
• Miranda RA, Casebeer WD, Hein AM, et al. DARPA-funded efforts in the development of novel brain-computer interface technologies. J Neurosci Methods. 2015;244:52–67.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders. (2016, September 26). 2012–2016 NIDCD strategic plan. [cited 2018 Oct 11]. Available from: https://www.nidcd.nih.gov/about/strategic-plan/2012-2016/2012-2016-nidcd-strategic-plan
   Google Scholar
• Ferris D. (2018 July 30). personal communication.
   Google Scholar
• Malloy A. (2018 July 31). personal communication.
   Google Scholar
• Association for Computing Machinery Transactions on Accessible Computing. (n.d.). Information for authors. cited 2018 Oct 11. Available from: https://www.rit.edu/gccis/taccess/authors.html
   Google Scholar
• Ziemann U. (2018 July 31). personal communication.
   Google Scholar
• Nam C. (2018 July 30). personal communication.
   Google Scholar
• The White House Office of the Press Secretary (2013, April 02). Fact sheet: brain initiative. [cited 2018 Oct 11]. Available from: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2013/04/02/fact-sheet-brain- initiative
   Google Scholar
• Baum F, MacDougall C, Smith D. Participatory action research. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2006;60(10):854–857.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abras C, Maloney-Krichmar D, Preece J. User-centered design. In: Bainbridge W, editor. Encyclopedia of human-computer interaction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2004. p. 445–456. DOI:10.1108/09504120610685373
   Google Scholar
• Cornwall A, Jewkes R. What is participatory research? Soc Sci Med. 1995;41(12):1667–1676.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blain-Moraes S, Schaff R, Gruis KL, et al. Barriers to and mediators of brain–computer interface user acceptance: focus group findings. Ergonomics. 2012;55(5):516–525.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huggins JE, Wren PA, Gruis KL. What would brain-computer interface users want? Opinions and priorities of potential users with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis. 2011;12(5):318–324.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al., The PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000097.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar