Toward methodologies for motor imagery enhancement: a tDCS-BCI study

References

• Mulder T. Motor imagery and action observation: cognitive tools for rehabilitation. J Neural Transm. 2007;114(10):1265–1278. doi: 10.1007/s00702-007-0763-z
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hétu S, Grégoire M, Saimpont A, et al. The neural network of motor imagery: an ALE meta-analysis. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2013 Jun;37(5):930–949. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2013.03.017. Epub 2013 Apr 10. PMID: 23583615.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lebon F, Horn U, Domin M, et al. Motor imagery training: Kinesthetic imagery strategy and inferior parietal fMRI activation. Hum Brain Mapp. 2018;39(4):1805–1813. doi: 10.1002/hbm.23956
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gentili R, Papaxanthis C, Pozzo T. Improvement and generalization of arm motor performance through motor imagery practice. Neuroscience. 2006;137(3):761–772. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2005.10.013
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mulder T, Zijlstra S, Zijlstra W, et al. The role of motor imagery in learning a totally novel movement. Exp Brain Res. 2004;154(2):211–217. doi: 10.1007/s00221-003-1647-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• García Carrasco D, Aboitiz Cantalapiedra J. Effectiveness of motor imagery or mental practice in functional recovery after stroke: a systematic review. Neurología (Engl Ed). 2016;31(1):43–52. doi: 10.1016/j.nrleng.2013.02.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mane R, Chouhan T, Guan C. BCI for stroke rehabilitation: motor and beyond. J Neural Eng. 2020;17(4):041001. doi: 10.1088/1741-2552/aba162
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pichiorri F, Morone G, Petti M, et al. Brain-computer interface boosts motor imagery practice during stroke recovery. Ann Neurol. 2015;77(5):851–865. doi: 10.1002/ana.24390
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrison KA, Winstein CJ, Aziz-Zadeh L. The mirror neuron system: a neural substrate for methods in stroke rehabilitation. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2010;24(5):404–412. doi: 10.1177/1545968309354536
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reynolds JE, Thornton AL, Elliott C, et al. A systematic review of mirror neuron system function in developmental coordination disorder: imitation, motor imagery, and neuroimaging evidence. In: Research in Developmental Disabilities. Vol. 47. Elsevier Inc; 2015. p. 234–283. doi: 10.1016/j.ridd.2015.09.015
   Google Scholar
• Höhne J, Holz E, Staiger-Sälzer P, et al. Motor imagery for severely motor-impaired patients: evidence for brain-computer interfacing as superior control solution. PLOS ONE. 2014;9(8):e104854. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0104854
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dobkin BH. Brain-computer interface technology as a tool to augment plasticity and outcomes for neurological rehabilitation. J Physiol. 2007;579(3):637–642. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.2006.123067
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kübler A, Birbaumer N. Brain-computer interfaces and communication in paralysis: extinction of goal directed thinking in completely paralysed patients?. Clin Neurophysiol. 2008;119(11):2658–2666. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2008.06.019
   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. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2008.03.034
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khan MA, Das R, Iversen HK, et al. Review on motor imagery based BCI systems for upper limb post-stroke neurorehabilitation: from designing to application. In: Computers in Biology and Medicine. Vol. 123. Elsevier Ltd; 2020. doi: 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2020.103843
   Google Scholar
• Wolpaw JR, Birbaumer N, Mcfarland DJ, et al. Brain–computer interfaces for communication and control. Clin Neurophysiol. 2002;113(6):767–791. doi: 10.1016/S1388-2457(02)00057-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolpaw JR, Mcfarland DJ, Neat GW, et al. An EEG-based brain-computer interface for cursor control. Electroencephalography Clin Neurophysiol. 1991;78(3):252–259. doi: 10.1016/0013-4694(91)90040-B
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Renard Y, Lotte F, Gibert G, et al. OpenViBE: an open-source software platform to design, test, and use brain–computer interfaces in real and virtual environments Presence: Teleoper Virt Environ. 2010;1(1):35–53. doi: 10.1162/pres.19.1.35
   Google Scholar
• Ahn M, Jun SC. Performance variation in motor imagery brain-computer interface: a brief review. J Neurosci Methods. 2015;243:103–110. doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2015.01.033
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edlinger G, Allison BZ, Guger C. How many people can use a BCI system? In: Kansaku K, Cohen LG Birbaumer N, editors. Clinical Systems Neuroscience. Springer Japan; 2015. p. 33–66. doi: 10.1007/978-4-431-55037-2_3
   Google Scholar
• Lotte F, Bougrain L, Cichocki A, et al. A review of classification algorithms for EEG-based brain–computer interfaces: a 10 year update. J Neural Eng. 2018;15(3). Institute of Physics Publishing. 031005. doi: 10.1088/1741-2552/aab2f2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blanco-Mora DA, Aldridge A, Jorge C, et al. Finding the optimal time window for increased classification accuracy during motor imagery. In: BIODEVICES 2021 - 14th International Conference on Biomedical Electronics and Devices; Part of the 14th International Joint Conference on Biomedical Engineering Systems and Technologies, BIOSTEC 2021; 2021. p. 144–151. doi: 10.5220/0010316101440151
   Google Scholar
• Blanco-Mora DA, Aldridge A, Jorge C, et al. Impact of age, VR, immersion, and spatial resolution on classifier performance for a MI-based BCI. Brain-Comput Interface. 2022;9(3):169–178. doi: 10.1080/2326263X.2022.2054606
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahn M, Cho H, Ahn S, et al. High theta and low alpha powers may be indicative of BCI-illiteracy in motor imagery. PLOS ONE. 2013;8(11): e80886. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0080886
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keil A, Bernat EM, Cohen MX, et al. Recommendations and publication guidelines for studies using frequency domain and time-frequency domain analyses of neural time series. Psychophysiology. 2022;59(5). doi: 10.1111/psyp.14052
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen MX. Analyzing neural time series data: theory and practice. 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobson L, Koslowsky M, Lavidor M. TDCS polarity effects in motor and cognitive domains: a meta-analytical review. Exp Brain Res. 2012;216(1):1–10. doi: 10.1007/s00221-011-2891-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nitsche MA, Paulus W. Excitability changes induced in the human motor cortex by weak transcranial direct current stimulation. J Physiol. 2000;527(3):633–639. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7793.2000.t01-1-00633.x
   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):S79–S87. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2014.08.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Hoornweder S, Vanderzande L, Bloemers E, et al. The effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on upper-limb function post-stroke: a meta-analysis of multiple-session studies. Clin Neurophysiol. 2021;132(8):1897–1918. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2021.05.015
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerloff C, Andres FG. Bimanual coordination and interhemispheric interaction. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2002;110(2–3):161–186. www.elsevier.com/locate/actpsy doi: 10.1016/S0001-6918(02)00032-X
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maes C, Gooijers J, Orban de Xivry JJ, et al. Two hands, one brain, and aging. In: Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews. Vol. 75. Elsevier Ltd; 2017. p. 234–256. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2017.01.052
   Google Scholar
• Gooijers J, Swinnen SP. Interactions between brain structure and behavior: the corpus callosum and bimanual coordination. In: Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews. Vol. 43. Elsevier Ltd; 2014. p. 1–19. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2014.03.008
   Google Scholar
• King JT, John AR, Wang YK, et al. Brain connectivity changes during bimanual and rotated motor imagery. IEEE J Transl Eng Health Med. 2022;10:1–8. doi: 10.1109/JTEHM.2022.3167552
   Google Scholar
• Saimpont A, Mercier C, Malouin F, et al. Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation enhances the effects of motor imagery training in a finger tapping task. Eur J Neurosci. 2016;43(1):113–119. doi: 10.1111/ejn.13122
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saruco E, Rienzo FD, Nunez-Nagy S, et al. Anodal tDCS over the primary motor cortex improves motor imagery benefits on postural control: a pilot study. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1). doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-00509-w
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lapenta OM, Minati L, Fregni F, et al. Jepense donc je fais: transcranial direct current stimulation modulates brain oscillations associated with motor imagery and movement observation. Front Human Neurosci. 2013;7. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00256
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matsumoto J, Fujiwara T, Takahashi O, et al. Modulation of mu rhythm desynchronization during motor imagery by transcranial direct current stimulation. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2010;7(1):27. http://www.jneuroengrehab.com/content/7/1/27
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wei P, He W, Zhou Y, et al. Performance of motor imagery brain-computer interface based on anodal transcranial direct current stimulation modulation. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2013;21(3):404–415. doi: 10.1109/TNSRE.2013.2249111
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Hoornweder S, Blanco-Mora DA, Depestele S, et al. Age and interlimb coordination complexity modulate oscillatory spectral dynamics and large-scale functional connectivity. Neuroscience. 2022;496:1–15. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2022.06.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Antal A, Alekseichuk I, Bikson M, et al. Low intensity transcranial electric stimulation: safety, ethical, legal regulatory and application guidelines. Clin Neurophysiol. 2017;128(9):1774–1809). Elsevier Ireland Ltd. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2017.06.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oldfield RC. The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsych. 1971 Mar;9(1): 97–113. doi: 10.1016/0028-3932(71)90067-4. PMID: 5146491.
   Google Scholar
• Malouin F, Richards CL, Jackson PL, et al. The kinesthetic and visual imagery questionnaire (KVIQ) for assessing motor imagery in persons with physical disabilities: a reliability and construct validity study. J Neurol Phys Ther. 2007;31(1):20–29. doi: 10.1097/01.NPT.0000260567.24122.64
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ko M-H. Safety of transcranial direct current stimulation in neurorehabilitation. Brain Neurorehabil. 2021;14(1). doi: 10.12786/bn.2021.14.e9
   Google Scholar
• Brooke J. SUS: a quick and dirty usability scale system usability scale. 1995. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228593520
   Google Scholar
• General Assembly of the World Medical Association. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. J Am Coll Dent. 2014;81(3): 14–8. PMID: 25951678.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sisti HM, Geurts M, Clerckx R, et al. Testing multiple coordination constraints with a novel bimanual visuomotor task. PLOS ONE. 2011;6(8):e23619. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0023619
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verstraelen S, van Dun K, Duque J, et al. Induced suppression of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex favorably changes interhemispheric communication during bimanual coordination in older adults–a neuronavigated rTMS study. Front Aging Neurosci. 2020;12:12. doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2020.00149
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vourvopoulos A, Ferreira A, Badia SBI. NeuRow: an immersive VR environment for motor-imagery training with the use of brain-computer interfaces and vibrotactile feedback. In: PhyCS 2016 - Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Physiological Computing Systems; 2016. p. 43–53. doi: 10.5220/0005939400430053
   Google Scholar
• Puonti O, van Leemput K, Saturnino GB, et al. Accurate and robust whole-head segmentation from magnetic resonance images for individualized head modeling. Neuroimage. 2020;219:219. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.117044
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thielscher A, Antunes A, Saturnino GB. Field modeling for transcranial magnetic stimulation: a useful tool to understand the physiological effects of TMS?. 2015. doi: 10.0/Linux-x86_64
   Google Scholar
• Pfurtscheller G, Neuper C, Muüller GR, et al. Graz-BCI: state of the art and clinical applications. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2003;11(2):177–180. doi: 10.1109/TNSRE.2003.814454
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delorme A, Makeig S. EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. J Neurosci Methods. 2004;134(1):9–21. doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2003.10.009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gustafsson FK. Determining the initial states in forward-backward filtering. In: IEEE Trans Signal Process. 1994;44:988–992.
   Google Scholar
• Delorme A. Clean rawdata (2.0). 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Pion-Tonachini L, Kreutz-Delgado K, Makeig S. ICLabel: an automated electroencephalographic independent component classifier, dataset, and website. Neuroimage. 2019;198:181–197. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.05.026
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perrin F, Pernier J, Bertrand O, et al. Spherical splines for scalp potential and current density mapping. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1989;72(2):184–187. doi: 10.1016/0013-4694(89)90180-6
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Van Hoornweder S, Blanco-Mora DA, Depestele S, et al. Aging and complexity effects on hemisphere-dependent movement-related beta desynchronization during bimanual motor planning and execution. Brain Sci. 2022;12(11):1444. doi: 10.3390/brainsci12111444
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• RStudio Team. RStudio: integrated Development for R. Boston, MA: RStudio, PBC; 2020. http://www.rstudio.com/
   Google Scholar
• Bourisly AK, Shuaib A. Neurophysiological effects of aging: a P200 ERP study. Transl Neurosci. 2018;9(1):61–66. doi: 10.1515/tnsci-2018-0011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cebolla AM, Petieau M, Cevallos C, et al. Long-lasting cortical reorganization as the result of motor imagery of throwing a ball in a virtual tennis court. Front Psychol. 2015;6(DEC). doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01869
   Google Scholar
• Potts GF. An ERP index of task relevance evaluation of visual stimuli. Brain Cogn. 2004;56(1):5–13. doi: 10.1016/j.bandc.2004.03.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mcfarland DJ, Miner LA, Vaughan TM, et al. Mu and beta rhythm topographies during motor imagery and actual movements. Brain Topogr. 2000;12(3):177–186. doi: 10.1023/A:1023437823106
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neuper C, Pfurtscheller G. Event-related dynamics of cortical rhythms: frequency-specific features and functional correlates. Int J Psychophysiol. 2001;43(1):41–58. doi: 10.1016/S0167-8760(01)00178-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neuper C, Scherer R, Wriessnegger S, et al. Motor imagery and action observation: modulation of sensorimotor brain rhythms during mental control of a brain-computer interface. Clin Neurophysiol. 2009;120(2):239–247. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2008.11.015
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abenna S, Nahid M, Bajit A. Motor imagery based brain-computer interface: improving the EEG classification using delta rhythm and LightGBM algorithm. Biomedical Signal Processing And Control. 2022;71:71. doi: 10.1016/j.bspc.2021.103102
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahn M, Ahn S, Hong JH, et al. Gamma band activity associated with BCI performance: simultaneous MEG/EEG study. Front Human Neurosci. 2013:7(DEC. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00848
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marcuse LV, Fields MC, Yoo J (Jenna). The normal adult EEG. In: Rowan’s Primer of EEG. Elsevier; 2016. p. 39–66. doi: 10.1016/b978-0-323-35387-8.00002-0
   Google Scholar
• Caulfield KA, George MS. Optimized APPS-tDCS electrode position, size, and distance doubles the on-target stimulation magnitude in 3000 electric field models. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1). doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-24618-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Hoornweder S, Caulfield KA, Nitsche M, et al. Addressing transcranial electrical stimulation variability through prospective individualized dosing of electric field strength in 300 participants across two samples: the 2-SPED approach. J Neural Eng. 2022;19(5):056045. doi: 10.1088/1741-2552/ac9a78
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar