Brain–computer interfacing in disorders of consciousness

References

• Cruse D, Owen AM. Consciousness revealed: New insights into the vegetative and minimally conscious states. Curr Opin Neurol 2010; 23: 656–660
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Monti MM, Laureys S, Owen AM. The vegetative state. BMJ 2010; 341: c3765
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laureys S, Celesia GG, Cohadon F, Lavrijsen J, Leon-Carrion J, Sannita WG, Sazbon L, Schmutzhard E, von Wild KR, Zeman A, et al. Unresponsive wakefulness syndrome: A new name for the vegetative state or apallic syndrome. BMC Med 2010; 8: 68
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schnakers C, Vanhaudenhuyse A, Giacino J, Ventura M, Boly M, Majerus S, Moonen G, Laureys S. Diagnostic accuracy of the vegetative and minimally conscious state: Clinical consensus versus standardized neurobehavioral assessment. BMC Neurol 2009; 9: 35
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Owen AM, Coleman MR, Boly M, Davis MH, Laureys S, Pickard JD. Detecting awareness in the vegetative state. Science 2006; 313: 1402
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Monti MM, Vanhaudenhuyse A, Coleman MR, Boly M, Pickard JD, Tshibanda L, Owen AM, Laureys S. Willful modulation of brain activity in disorders of consciousness. N Engl J Med 2010; 362: 579–589
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kübler A, Brain-computer interfaces for communication in paralysed patients and implications for disorders of consciousness. In: Laureys S, Tononi G, editors. The Neurology of Consciousness. Academic Press – Elsevier; 2009. p. 217–234
   Google Scholar
• Mason SG, Birch GE. A general framework for brain-computer interface design. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2003; 11: 70–85
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kubler A, Neumann N. Brain-computer intrerfaces - the key for the conscious brain locked into a paralyzed body. Prog Brain Res 2005; 150: 513–525
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farwell LA, Donchin E. Talking off the top of your head: Toward a mental prosthesis utilizing event-related brain potentials. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1988; 70: 510–523
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ingvar DH, Philipson L. Distribution of cerebral blood flow in the dominant hemisphere during motor ideation and motor performance. Ann Neurol 1977; 2: 230–237
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pfurtscheller G, Neuper C, Krausz G. Functional dissociation of lower and upper frequency mu rhythms in relation to voluntary limb movement. Clin Neurophysiol 2000; 111: 1873–1879
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kubler A, Nijboer F, Mellinger J, Vaughan TM, Pawelzik H, Schalk G, McFarland DJ, Birbaumer N, Wolpaw JR. Patients with ALS can use sensorimotor rhythms to operate a brain-computer interface. Neurology 2005; 64: 1775–1777
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Regan D. Steady-state evoked potentials. Journal of the Optical Society of America 1977; 67: 1475–1489
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng M, Gao X, Gao S, Xu D. Design and implementation of a brain-computer interface with high transfer rates. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2002; 49: 1181–1186
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Birbaumer N, Ghanayim N, Hinterberger T, Iversen I, Kotchoubey B, Kubler A, Perelmouter J, Taub E, Flor H. A spelling device for the paralysed. Nature 1999; 398: 297–298
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kubler A, Kotchoubey B, Hinterberger T, Ghanayim N, Perelmouter J, Schauer M, Fritsch C, Taub E, Birbaumer N. The thought translation device: A neurophysiological approach to communication in total motor paralysis. Exp Brain Res 1999; 124: 223–232
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walter WG, Cooper R, Aldridge VJ, McCallum WC, Winter AL. Contingent negative variation: An electric sign of sensorimotor association and expectancy in the human brain. Nature 1964; 203: 380–384
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sutton S, Braren M, Zubin J, John ER. Evoked-potential correlates of stimulus uncertainty. Science 1965; 150: 1187–1188
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Donchin E, Smith DB. The contingent negative variation and the late positive wave of the average evoked potential. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1970; 29: 201–203
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fabiani M, Gratton G, Karis D, Donchin E, Definition, identification and reliability of the p300 component of the event-related brain potential. In: Ackles P, Jennings J, Coles M. editors. Advances in psychophysiology. 2nd ed. New York: JAI Press; 1987. p. 1–78
   Google Scholar
• Squires KC, Donchin E, Herning RI, McCarthy G. On the influence of task relevance and stimulus probability on event-related-potential components. Electroencephalogr in Clin Neurophysiol 1977; 42: 1–14
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Donchin E, Spencer KM, Wijesinghe R. The mental prosthesis: Assessing the speed of a P300-based brain-computer interface. IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng 2000; 8: 174–179
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Martens SM, Hill NJ, Farquhar J, Scholkopf B. Overlap and refractory effects in a brain-computer interface speller based on the visual P300 event-related potential. J Neural Eng 2009; 6: 026003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salvaris M, Sepulveda F. Visual modifications on the P300 speller BCI paradigm. J Neural Eng 2009; 6: 046011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Townsend G, LaPallo BK, Boulay CB, Krusienski DJ, Frye GE, Hauser CK, Schwartz NE, Vaughan TM, Wolpaw JR, Sellers EW. A novel P300-based brain-computer interface stimulus presentation paradigm: Moving beyond rows and columns. Clin Neurophysiol 2010; 121: 1109–1120
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lenhardt A, Kaper M, Ritter HJ. An adaptive P300-based online brain-computer interface. IEEE Trans Neural Sys Rehabil Eng 2008; 16: 121–130
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krusienski DJ, Sellers EW, McFarland DJ, Vaughan TM, Wolpaw JR. Toward enhanced P300 speller performance. J Neurosci Methods 2008; 167: 15–21
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guger C, Daban S, Sellers E, Holzner C, Krausz G, Carabalona R, Gramatica F, Edlinger G. How many people are able to control a P300-based brain-computer interface (BCI)?. Neurosci Lett 2009; 462: 94–98
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Birbaumer N, Breaking the silence: brain-computer interfaces (BCI) for communication and motor control. Psychophysiology 2006;43:517–532
   Google Scholar
• Nijboer F, Furdea A, Gunst I, Mellinger J, McFarland DJ, Birbaumer N, Kubler A. An auditory brain-computer interface (BCI). J Neurosci Methods 2008; 167: 43–50
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nijboer F, Sellers EW, Mellinger J, Jordan MA, Matuz T, Furdea A, Halder S, Mochty U, Krusienski DJ, Vaughan TM, et al. A P300-based brain-computer interface for people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Clin Neurophysiol 2008; 119: 1909–1916
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Finke A, Lenhardt A, Ritter H. The MindGame: A P300-based brain-computer interface game. Neural Network 2009; 22: 1329–1333
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Citi L, Poli R, Cinel C, Sepulveda F. P300-based BCI mouse with genetically-optimized analogue control. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2008; 16(1)51–61
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bayliss JD, Ballard DH. A virtual reality testbed for brain–computer interface research. IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng 2000; 8: 188–190
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Coleman MR, Davis MH, Rodd JM, Robson A, Owen AM, Pickard JD. Towards the routine use of brain imaging to aid the clinical diagnosis of disorders of consciousness. Brain 2009; 132: 2541–2552
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fernandez-Espejo D, Junque C, Vendrell P, Bernabeu M, Roig T, Bargallo N, Mercader JM. Cerebral response to speech in vegetative and minimally conscious states after traumatic brain injury. Brain Inj 2008; 22: 882–890
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis MH, Coleman MR, Absalom AR, Rodd JM, Johnsrude IS, Matta BF, Owen AM, Menon DK. Dissociating speech perception and comprehension at reduced levels of awareness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 2007; 104: 16032–16037
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Di HB, Yu SM, Weng XC, Laureys S, Yu D, Li JQ, Qin PM, Zhu YH, Zhang SZ, Chen YZ. Cerebral response to patient's own name in the vegetative and minimally conscious states. Neurology 2007; 68: 895–899
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qin P, Di H, Liu Y, Yu S, Gong Q, Duncan N, Weng X, Laureys S, Northoff G. Anterior cingulate activity and the self in disorders of consciousness. Hum Brain Mapp 2010; 31: 1993–2002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Staffen W, Kronbichler M, Aichhorn M, Mair A, Ladurner G. Selective brain activity in response to one's own name in the persistent vegetative state. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2006; 77: 1383–1384
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qin P, Di H, Yan X, Yu S, Yu D, Laureys S, Weng X. Mismatch negativity to the patient's own name in chronic disorders of consciousness. Neurosci Lett 2008; 448: 24–28
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schnakers C, Perrin F, Schabus M, Majerus S, Ledoux D, Damas P, Boly M, Vanhaudenhuyse A, Bruno MA, Moonen G, et al. Voluntary brain processing in disorders of consciousness. Neurology 2008; 71: 1614–1620
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schnakers C, Perrin F, Schabus M, Hustinx R, Majerus S, Moonen G, Boly M, Vanhaudenhuyse A, Bruno MA, Laureys S. Detecting consciousness in a total locked-in syndrome: An active event-related paradigm. Neurocase 2009; 4: 1–7
   Google Scholar
• Monti MM, Coleman MR, Owen AM. Executive functions in the absence of behavior: Functional imaging of the minimally conscious state. Prog Brain Res 2009; 177: 249–260
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hill NJ, Lal TN, Bierig K, Birbaumer N, Scholkopf BN, An auditory paradigm for brain-computer interfaces, in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. In: Saul LK, Weiss Y, Bottou L. editors. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press; 2005. p. 569–576
   Google Scholar
• Sellers EW, Donchin E. A P300-based brain-computer interface: Initial tests by ALS patients. Clin Neurophysiol 2006; 117: 538–548
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schreuder M, Blankertz B, Tangermann M. A new auditory multi-class brain-computer interface paradigm: Spatial hearing as an informative cue. PLoS One 2010; 5: e9813
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halder S, Rea M, Andreoni R, Nijboer F, Hammer EM, Kleih SC, Birbaumer N, Kubler A. An auditory oddball brain-computer interface for binary choices. Clin Neurophysiol 2010; 121: 516–523
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klobassa DS, Vaughan TM, Brunner P, Schwartz NE, Wolpaw JR, Neuper C, Sellers EW. Toward a high-throughput auditory P300-based brain-computer interface. Clin Neurophysiol 2009; 120: 1252–1261
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Furdea A, Halder S, Krusienski DJ, Bross D, Nijboer F, Birbaumer N, Kubler A. An auditory oddball (P300) spelling system for brain-computer interfaces. Psychophysiology 2009; 46: 617–625
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kubler A, Furdea A, Halder S, Hammer EM, Nijboer F, Kotchoubey B. A brain-computer interface controlled auditory event-related potential (p300) spelling system for locked-in patients. Annals of the New York Academy of Science 2009; 1157: 90–100
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kanoh S, Miyamoto K, Yoshinobu T. A brain-computer interface (BCI) system based on auditory stream segregation. Conference Proceedings of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society 2008; 2008: 642–645
   Google Scholar
• Brouwer AM, van Erp JB. A tactile p300 brain-computer interface. Front Neurosci 2010;4:19
   Google Scholar
• Bianchi L, Sami S, Hillebrand A, Fawcett IP, Quitadamo LR, Seri S. Which physiological components are more suitable for visual ERP based brain-computer interface? A preliminary MEG/EEG study. Brain Topogr 2010; 23: 180–185
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Babiloni C, Carducci F, Cincotti F, Rossini PM, Neuper C, Pfurtscheller G, Babiloni F. Human movement-related potentials vs desynchronization of EEG alpha rhythm: A high-resolution EEG study. Neuroimage 1999; 10: 658–665
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolpaw JR, McFarland DJ, Neat GW, Forneris CA. An EEG-based brain-computer interface for cursor control. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1991; 78: 252–259
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wolpaw JR, Birbaumer N, McFarland DJ, Pfurtscheller G, Vaughan TM. Brain-computer interfaces for communication and control. Clin Neurophysiol 2002; 113: 767–791
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niedermeyer E, Goldszmidt A, Ryan D. “Mu rhythm status” and clinical correlates. Clin EEG Neurosci 2004; 35: 84–87
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chatrian GE, Petersen MC, Lazarte JA. The blocking of the rolandic wicket rhythm and some central changes related to movement. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1959; 11: 497–510
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pfurtscheller G, Lopes da Silva FH. Event-related EEG/MEG synchronization and desynchronization: Basic principles. Clin Neurophysiol 1999; 110: 1842–1857
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pfurtscheller G, Aranibar A. Evaluation of event-related desynchronization (ERD) preceding and following voluntary self-paced movement. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1979; 46: 138–146
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pfurtscheller G, Neuper C, Flotzinger D, Pregenzer M. EEG-based discrimination between imagination of right and left hand movement. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1997; 103: 642–651
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jeannerod M. Neural simulation of action: A unifying mechanism for motor cognition. Neuroimage 2001; 14: S103–S109
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neuper C, Scherer R, Reiner M, Pfurtscheller G. Imagery of motor actions: Differential effects of kinesthetic and visual-motor mode of imagery in single-trial EEG. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res 2005; 25: 668–677
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Neuper C, Muller-Putz GR, Scherer R, Pfurtscheller G. Motor imagery and EEG-based control of spelling devices and neuroprostheses. Prog Brain Res 2006; 159: 393–409
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guger C, Edlinger G, Harkam W, Niedermayer I, Pfurtscheller G. How many people are able to operate an EEG-based brain-computer interface (BCI)? Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering. IEEE Transactions on 2003; 11: 145–147
   Google Scholar
• Kotchoubey B, Lang S, Winter S, Birbaumer N. Cognitive processing in completely paralyzed patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Eur J Neurol 2003; 10: 551–558
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buch E, Weber C, Cohen LG, Braun C, Dimyan MA, Ard T, Mellinger J, Caria A, Soekadar S, Fourkas A, Birbaumer N. Think to move: A neuromagnetic brain-computer interface (BCI) system for chronic stroke. Stroke 2008; 39: 910–917
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Millan Jdel R, Mourino J. Asynchronous BCI and local neural classifiers: An overview of the Adaptive Brain Interface project. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2003; 11: 159–161
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Scherer R, Muller GR, Neuper C, Graimann B, Pfurtscheller G. An asynchronously controlled EEG-based virtual keyboard: Improvement of the spelling rate. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2004; 51: 979–984
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neuper C, Muller GR, Kubler A, Birbaumer N, Pfurtscheller G. Clinical application of an EEG-based brain-computer interface: A case study in a patient with severe motor impairment. Clin Neurophysiol 2003; 114: 399–409
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perelmouter J, Birbaumer N. A binary spelling interface with random errors. IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng 2000; 8: 227–232
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pfurtscheller G, Brunner C, Schlogl A, Lopes da Silva FH. Mu rhythm (de)synchronization and EEG single-trial classification of different motor imagery tasks. Neuroimage 2006; 31: 153–159
   Google Scholar
• Klimesch W. EEG alpha and theta oscillations reflect cognitive and memory performance: A review and analysis. Brain Res Brain Res Rev 1999; 29: 169–195
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolpaw JR, McFarland DJ, Vaughan TM. Brain-computer interface research at the Wadsworth Center. IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng 2000; 8: 222–226
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Blankertz B, Tomioka R, Lemm S, Kawanabe M, Muller K. Optimizing spatial filters for robust EEG single-trial analysis. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine 2008; 25: 41
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bekinschtein TA, Coleman MR, Niklison J, Pickard JD, Manes FF. Can electromyography objectively detect voluntary movement in Disorders of Consciousness?. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry 2007; 79: 826–828
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Goldfine AM, Victor JD, Conte MM, Bardin JC, Schiff ND. Determination of awareness in patients with severe brain injury using EEG power spectral analysis. Clin Neurophysiol 2011; 122: 2157–2168
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cruse D, Chennu S, Chatelle C, Bekinschtein T, Fernández-Espejo D, Junqué C, Pickard J, Laureys S, Owen A. Bedside detection of awareness in the vegetative state. The Lancet 2011; 378: 2088–2094
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cruse D, Chennu S, Chatelle C, Fernández-Espejo D, Bekinschtein T, Pickard J, Laureys S, Owen A. The relationship between aetiology and covert cognition in the minimally-conscious state. Neurology 2012; 78: 816–822
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cincotti F, Kauhanen L, Aloise F, Palomaki T, Caporusso N, Jylanki P, Mattia D, Babiloni F, Vanacker G, Nuttin M, Marciani MG, Del RMJ. Vibrotactile feedback for brain-computer interface operation. Comput Intell Neurosci 2007; 2007: 1–12
   Google Scholar
• Sakurai Y, Momose T, Iwata M, Sasaki Y, Kanazawa I. Activation of prefrontal and posterior superior temporal areas in visual calculation. J Neurol Sci 1996; 139: 89–94
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dehaene S, The Number Sense: How the Mind Creates Mathematics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 1997
   Google Scholar
• Rappelsberger P, Petsche H. Probability mapping: Power and coherence analyses of cognitive processes. Brain Topogr 1988; 1: 46–54
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Curran EA, Stokes MJ. Learning to control brain activity: A review of the production and control of EEG components for driving brain-computer interface (BCI) systems. Brain Cogn 2003; 51: 326–336
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vialatte FB, Maurice M, Dauwels J, Cichocki A. Steady-state visually evoked potentials: Focus on essential paradigms and future perspectives. Prog Neurobiol 2010; 90: 418–438
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Regan D, Human Brain Electrophysiology: Evoked Potentials and Evoked Magnetic Fields in Science and Medicine.New York: Elsevier; 1989
   Google Scholar
• Herrman CS. Human EEG responses to 1-100 Hz flicker: Resonance phenomena in visual cortex and their potential correlation to cognitive phenomena. Experimental Brain Research 2001; 137: 346–353
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Perlstein WM, Cole MA, Larson M, Kelly K, Seignourel P, Keil A. Steady-state visual evoked potentials reveal frontally-mediated working memory activity in humans. Neurosci Lett 2003; 342: 191–195
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Regan D. Some characteristics of average steady-state and transient responses evoked by modulated light. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1966; 20: 238–248
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gray M, Kemp AH, Silberstein RB, Nathan PJ. Cortical neurophysiology of anticipatory anxiety: An investigation utilizing steady state probe topography (SSPT). Neuroimage 2003; 20: 975–986
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang Y, Wang R, Gao X, Hong B, Gao S. A practical VEP-based brain-computer interface. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2006; 14: 234–239
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Middendorf M, McMillan G, Calhoun G, Jones KS. Brain-computer interfaces based on the steady-state visual-evoked response. IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng 2000; 8: 211–214
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Muller-Putz GR, Scherer R, Brauneis C, Pfurtscheller G. Steady-state visual evoked potential (SSVEP)-based communication: Impact of harmonic frequency components. J Neural Eng 2005; 2: 123–130
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parini S., Maggi L., Turconi A.C., Andreoni G. A robust and self-paced BCI system based on a four class SSVEP paradigm: Algorithms and protocols for a high-transfer-rate direct brain communication. Comput Intell Neurosci, 2009; 2009: 1–11
   Google Scholar
• Kelly SP, Lalor EC, Reilly RB, Foxe JJ. Visual spatial attention tracking using high-density SSVEP data for independent brain-computer communication. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2005; 13: 172–178
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allison BZ, McFarland DJ, Schalk G, Zheng SD, Jackson MM, Wolpaw JR. Towards an independent brain-computer interface using steady state visual evoked potentials. Clin Neurophysiol 2008; 119: 399–408
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang D, Maye A, Gao X, Hong B, Engel AK, Gao S. An independent brain-computer interface using covert non-spatial visual selective attention. J Neural Eng 2010; 7: 16010
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Müller GR, Neuper C, Pfurtscheller G. “Resonance-like” Frequencies of Sensorimotor Areas Evoked by Repetitive Tactile Stimulation. Biomedical Engineering 2001; 46: 186–190
   Google Scholar
• Snyder AZ. Steady-state vibration evoked potentials: Descriptions of technique and characterization of responses. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1992; 84: 257–268
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tobimatsu S, Zhang YM, Kato M. Steady-state vibration somatosensory evoked potentials: Physiological characteristics and tuning function. Clin Neurophysiol 1999; 110: 1953–1958
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tobimatsu S, Zhang YM, Suga R, Kato M. Differential temporal coding of the vibratory sense in the hand and foot in man. Clin Neurophysiol 2000; 111: 398–404
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Giabbiconi CM, Dancer C, Zopf R, Gruber T, Muller MM. Selective spatial attention to left or right hand flutter sensation modulates the steady-state somatosensory evoked potential. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res 2004; 20: 58–66
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Muller-Putz GR, Scherer R, Neuper C, Pfurtscheller G. Steady-state somatosensory evoked potentials: Suitable brain signals for brain-computer interfaces?. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2006; 14: 30–37
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang D, Wang Y, Maye A, Engel AK, Gao X, Hong B, Gao S, editors. A Brain-Computer Interface Based on Multi-Modal Attention. 3rd International IEEE EMBS Conference on Neural Engineering. Hawaii. USA. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE); 2007. p 414–417
   Google Scholar
• Ross B, Borgmann C, Draganova R, Roberts LE, Pantev C. A high-precision magnetoencephalographic study of human auditory steady-state responses to amplitude-modulated tones. J Acoust Soc Am 2000; 108: 679–691
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ross B, Picton TW, Herdman AT, Pantev C. The effect of attention on the auditory steady-state response. Neurol Clin Neurophysiol 2004; 2004: 22
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pastor MA, Artieda J, Arbizu J, Marti-Climent JM, Penuelas I, Masdeu JC. Activation of human cerebral and cerebellar cortex by auditory stimulation at 40 Hz. J Neurosci 2002; 22: 10501–10506
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Picton TW, John MS, Dimitrijevic A, Purcell D. Human auditory steady-state responses. Int J Audiol 2003; 42: 177–219
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Birbaumer N, Slow cortical potentials: Their origin, meaning, and clinical use. in: van Boxtel GJM, K. Böcker, editors. Brain and behavior past, present, and future. ed. Tilburg: Tilburg University Press; 1997. p. 25–39
   Google Scholar
• Elbert T, Rockstroh B, Lutzenberger W, Birbaumer N. Biofeedback of slow cortical potentials. I. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1980; 48: 293–301
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Birbaumer N, Kubler A, Ghanayim N, Hinterberger T, Perelmouter J, Kaiser J, Iversen I, Kotchoubey B, Neumann N, Flor H. The thought translation device (TTD) for completely paralyzed patients. IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng 2000; 8: 190–193
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pham M, Hinterberger T, Neumann N, Kubler A, Hofmayer N, Grether A, Wilhelm B, Vatine JJ, Birbaumer N. An auditory brain-computer interface based on the self-regulation of slow cortical potentials. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2005; 19: 206–218
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hill NJ, Lal TN, Schroder M, Hinterberger T, Wilhelm B, Nijboer F, Mochty U, Widman G, Elger C, Scholkopf B, Kubler A, Birbaumer N. Classifying EEG and ECoG signals without subject training for fast BCI implementation: Comparison of nonparalyzed and completely paralyzed subjects. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2006; 14: 183–186
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kübler A, Mushahwar VK, Hochberg LR, Donoghue JP. BCI Meeting 2005-workshop on clinical issues and applications. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2006; 14: 131–134
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Demertzi A, Schnakers C, Ledoux D, Chatelle C, Bruno MA, Vanhaudenhuyse A, Boly M, Moonen G, Laureys S. Different beliefs about pain perception in the vegetative and minimally conscious states: A European survey of medical and paramedical professionals. Prog Brain Res 2009; 177: 329–338
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar