CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 125

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The state of clinical trials of implantable brain–computer interfaces

Patrick-Krueger, K. Michelle, Burkhart, Ian, Contreras-Vidal, Jose L.·2024·Nature Reviews Bioengineering
DOI 10.1038/s44222-024-00239-5
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s44222-024-00239-5

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 25 references

Research works printed but not linked: 194

  1. Salles, A. et al. The human brain project: responsible brain research for the benefit of society. Neuron 101, 380–384 (2019). · DOI
  2. Angrick, M. et al. Online speech synthesis using a chronically implanted brain–computer interface in an individual with ALS. Sci. Rep. 14, 9617 (2024). · DOI
  3. Kennedy, P. R., Bakay, R. A., Moore, M. M., Adams, K. & Goldwaithe, J. Direct control of a computer from the human central nervous system. IEEE Trans. Rehabil. Eng. 8, 198–202 (2000). · DOI
  4. Benabid, A. L. et al. An exoskeleton controlled by an epidural wireless brain-machine interface in a tetraplegic patient: a proof-of-concept demonstration. Lancet Neurol. 18, 1112–1122 (2019). · DOI · Paper page
  5. Friedenberg, D. A. et al. Neuroprosthetic-enabled control of graded arm muscle contraction in a paralyzed human. Sci. Rep. 7, 8386 (2017). · DOI
  6. Sharma, G. et al. Using an artificial neural bypass to restore cortical control of rhythmic movements in a human with quadriplegia. Sci. Rep. 6, 33807 (2016).
  7. Tang, X., Shen, H., Zhao, S., Li, N. & Liu, J. Flexible brain–computer interfaces. Nat. Electron. 6, 109–118 (2023). · DOI
  8. Wang, Y., Yang, X., Zhang, X., Wang, Y. & Pei, W. Implantable intracortical microelectrodes: reviewing the present with a focus on the future. Microsyst. Nanoeng. 9, 7 (2023). · DOI
  9. Davis, K. C. et al. Design-development of an at-home modular brain-computer interface (BCI) platform in a case study of cervical spinal cord injury. J. Neuroeng. Rehabil. 19, 53 (2022). · DOI
  10. Rubin, D. B. et al. Interim safety profile from the feasibility study of the braingate neural interface system. Neurology 100, e1177–e1192 (2023).
  11. Mitchell, P. et al. Assessment of safety of a fully implanted endovascular brain-computer interface for severe paralysis in 4 patients: the stentrode with thought-controlled digital switch (SWITCH) study. JAMA Neurol. 80, 270–278 (2023). · DOI
  12. Han, J. J. Synchron receives FDA approval to begin early feasibility study of their endovascular, brain-computer interface device. Artif. Organs 45, 1134–1135 (2021). · DOI
  13. Keller, C. J. et al. Heterogeneous neuronal firing patterns during interictal epileptiform discharges in the human cortex. Brain 133, 1668–1681 (2010). · DOI
  14. Fox, N. P., Leonard, M., Sjerps, M. J. & Chang, E. F. Transformation of a temporal speech cue to a spatial neural code in human auditory cortex. eLife 9, e53051 (2020).
  15. Harris, L. J. & Almerigi, J. B. Probing the human brain with stimulating electrodes: the story of Roberts Bartholow’s (1874) experiment on Mary Rafferty. Brain Cogn. 70, 92–115 (2009). · DOI
  16. Walter, W. G., Cooper, R., Aldridge, V. J., McCallum, W. C. & Winter, A. L. Contingent negative variation: an electric sign of sensorimotor association and expectancy in the human brain. Nature 203, 380–384 (1964). · DOI · Paper page
  17. Frank, K. Some approaches to the technical problem of chronic excitation of peripheral nerve. Ann. Otol. Rhinol. Laryngol. 77, 761–771 (1968). · DOI
  18. Fetz, E. E. Operant conditioning of cortical unit activity. Science 163, 955–958 (1969). · DOI
  19. Estrin, T. On-line electroencephalographic digital computing system. Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 19, 524–526 (1965). · DOI
  20. Vidal, J. J. Toward direct brain-computer communication. Annu. Rev. Biophys. Bioeng. 2, 157–180 (1973). · DOI
  21. Gearing, M. & Kennedy, P. Histological confirmation of myelinated neural filaments within the tip of the neurotrophic electrode after a decade of neural recordings. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 14, 111 (2020). · DOI
  22. Degenhart, A. D. et al. Remapping cortical modulation for electrocorticographic brain-computer interfaces: a somatotopy-based approach in individuals with upper-limb paralysis. J. Neural Eng. 15, 026021 (2018). · DOI
  23. Bartels, J. et al. Neurotrophic electrode: method of assembly and implantation into human motor speech cortex. J. Neurosci. Methods 174, 168–176 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  24. Woeppel, K. et al. Explant analysis of utah electrode arrays implanted in human cortex for brain-computer-interfaces. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 9, 759711 (2021). · DOI · Paper page
  25. Colachis, S. C. T. et al. Long-term intracortical microelectrode array performance in a human: a 5 year retrospective analysis. J. Neural Eng. 18, 0460d7 (2021). · DOI
  26. Szymanski, L. J. et al. Neuropathological effects of chronically implanted, intracortical microelectrodes in a tetraplegic patient. J. Neural Eng. 18, 0460b9 (2021). · DOI
  27. Kuruvilla, A. & Flink, R. Intraoperative electrocorticography in epilepsy surgery: useful or not? Seizure 12, 577–584 (2003). · DOI
  28. Bink, H. et al. Spatiotemporal evolution of focal epileptiform activity from surface and laminar field recordings in cat neocortex. J. Neurophysiol. 119, 2068–2081 (2018). · DOI
  29. Alahi, M. E. E. et al. Recent advancement of electrocorticography (ECoG) electrodes for chronic neural recording/stimulation. Mater. Today Commun. 29, 102853 (2021). · DOI
  30. Wang, W. et al. An electrocorticographic brain interface in an individual with tetraplegia. PLoS One 8, e55344 (2013). · DOI
  31. Freudenburg, Z. V. et al. Sensorimotor ECoG signal features for BCI control: a comparison between people with locked-in syndrome and able-bodied controls. Front. Neurosci. 13, 1058 (2019). · DOI
  32. Soldozy, S. et al. A systematic review of endovascular stent-electrode arrays, a minimally invasive approach to brain-machine interfaces. Neurosurg. Focus 49, E3 (2020). · DOI
  33. Oxley, T. J. et al. Motor neuroprosthesis implanted with neurointerventional surgery improves capacity for activities of daily living tasks in severe paralysis: first in-human experience. J. Neurointerv. Surg. 13, 102–108 (2021). · DOI · Paper page
  34. Kennedy, P. Changes in emotional state modulate neuronal firing rates of human speech motor cortex: a case study in long-term recording. Neurocase 17, 381–393 (2011). · DOI
  35. Coughlin, B. et al. Modified neuropixels probes for recording human neurophysiology in the operating room. Nat. Protoc. 18, 2927–2953 (2023). · DOI
  36. Altayyar, S. S. The essential principles of safety and effectiveness for medical devices and the role of standards. Med. Devices 13, 49–55 (2020). · DOI
  37. Seo, G., Park, S. & Lee, M. How to calculate the life cycle of high-risk medical devices for patient safety. Front. Public Health 10, 989320 (2022). · DOI
  38. Tandy, J., Hanhquynh Le, K., Deane, G. M. & Burns, S. J. Cleanability of metal surface finishes found in medical devices and the environment of care. Biomed. Instrum. Technol. 56, 29–36 (2022). · DOI
  39. Kennedy, P. et al. Making the lifetime connection between brain and machine for restoring and enhancing function. Prog. Brain Res. 194, 1–25 (2011). · DOI
  40. Lim, J. et al. Suppression of cortical electrostimulation artifacts using pre-whitening and null projection. J. Neural Eng. 20, 056018 (2023). · DOI
  41. Chavarriaga, R., Carey, C., Contreras-Vidal, J. L., McKinney, Z. & Bianchi, L. Standardization of neurotechnology for brain-machine interfacing: state of the art and recommendations. IEEE Open J. Eng. Med. Biol. 2, 71–73 (2021). · DOI
  42. Klingner, C. M. et al. Research data management in clinical neuroscience: the national research data infrastructure initiative. Neuroforum 27, 35–43 (2021).
  43. Easttom, C. et al. A functional model for unifying brain computer interface terminology. IEEE Open J. Eng. Med. Biol. 2, 91–96 (2021). · DOI
  44. Pierré, A. et al. A perspective on neuroscience data standardization with Neurodata Without Borders. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2310.04317 (2023). · DOI
  45. Rubel, O. et al. Methods for specifying scientific data standards and modeling relationships with applications to neuroscience. Front. Neuroinform. 10, 48 (2016). · DOI
  46. Bridgelal Ram, M., Grocott, P. R. & Weir, H. C. Issues and challenges of involving users in medical device development. Health Expect. 11, 63–71 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  47. North, R. B., Konrad, P. E., Judy, J. W., Ries, A. J. & Stevenson, R. Examining the need to standardize implanted stimulator connectors: NANS Survey results. Neuromodulation 24, 1299–1306 (2021). · DOI
  48. Tedersoo, L. et al. Data sharing practices and data availability upon request differ across scientific disciplines. Sci. Data 8, 192 (2021). · DOI
  49. Rahimzadeh, V. et al. Benefits of sharing neurophysiology data from the BRAIN Initiative Research Opportunities in Humans Consortium. Neuron 111, 3710–3715 (2023). · DOI
  50. Guest, J., Datta, N., Jimsheleishvili, G. & Gater, D. R. Jr. Pathophysiology, classification and comorbidities after traumatic spinal cord injury. J. Pers. Med. 12, 1126 (2022). · DOI
  51. Zarei, S. et al. A comprehensive review of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Surg. Neurol. Int. 6, 171 (2015). · DOI
  52. Noreika, V., Georgieva, S., Wass, S. & Leong, V. 14 Challenges and their solutions for conducting social neuroscience and longitudinal EEG research with infants. Infant. Behav. Dev. 58, 101393 (2020). · DOI
  53. Katyal, K. D. et al. A collaborative BCI approach to autonomous control of a prosthetic limb system. In Proc. 2014 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC). 1479–1482 (2014). · DOI
  54. Wang, R., Zhu, J., Zhang, J., Ma, Y. & Jiang, H. Psychological assessments of a senile patient with tetraplegia who received brain-computer interface implantation: a case report. Neurol. Sci. 43, 1427–1430 (2022). · DOI
  55. Simeral, J. D. et al. Home use of a percutaneous wireless intracortical brain-computer interface by individuals with tetraplegia. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 68, 2313–2325 (2021). · DOI · Paper page
  56. Drew, L. The rise of brain-reading technology: what you need to know. Nature 623, 241–243 (2023). · DOI
  57. Klein, E. Ethics and the emergence of brain-computer interface medicine. Handb. Clin. Neurol. 168, 329–339 (2020). · DOI
  58. Vansteensel, M. J. et al. Towards clinical application of implantable brain-computer interfaces for people with late-stage ALS: medical and ethical considerations. J. Neurol. 270, 1323–1336 (2023). · DOI
  59. Wexler, A. et al. Ethical issues in intraoperative neuroscience research: assessing subjects’ recall of informed consent and motivations for participation. AJOB Empir. Bioeth. 13, 57–66 (2022). · DOI
  60. Hendriks, S., Hsu, N., Beckel-Mitchener, A. C., Ngai, J. & Grady, C. Continuing trial responsibilities for implantable neural devices. Neuron 111, 3143–3149 (2023). · DOI
  61. Tubig, P. & Gilbert, F. in Policy, Identity, and Neurotechnology. Advances in Neuroethics (eds. Dubljević, V. & Coin, A.) Ch. 3 (Springer, 2023).
  62. Strickland, E. & Harris, M. Their Bionic Eyes are Now Obsolete and Unsupported. IEEE Spectrum https://spectrum.ieee.org/bionic-eye-obsolete (2022).
  63. Drew, L. Abandoned: the human cost of neurotechnology failure. Nature https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-03810-5 (2022). · DOI
  64. McCay, A. Neurorights: the Chilean constitutional change. AI Soc. 39, 797–798 (2022). · DOI
  65. Munoz, J. M. et al. Effects of the first successful lawsuit against a consumer neurotechnology company for violating brain data privacy. Nat. Biotechnol. 42, 1015–1016 (2024). · DOI
  66. Lottes, A. E. et al. Navigating the regulatory pathway for medical devices-a conversation with the FDA, clinicians, researchers, and industry experts. J. Cardiovasc. Transl. Res. 15, 927–943 (2022). · DOI
  67. Takahashi, T. et al. Commercialization of regenerative-medicine therapies. Nat. Rev. Bioeng. 1, 906–929 (2023). · DOI
  68. Schalk, G. et al. Translation of neurotechnologies. Nat. Rev. Bioeng. 2, 637–652 (2024). · DOI
  69. Krause, P. et al. Deep brain stimulation in early onset Parkinson’s disease. Front. Neurol. 13, 1041449 (2022). · DOI
  70. Tyler, R. S. Cochlear implants and the deaf culture. Am. J. Audiol. 2, 26–32 (1993). · DOI
  71. Liu, K. A. & Mager, N. A. Women’s involvement in clinical trials: historical perspective and future implications. Pharm. Pract. 14, 708 (2016).
  72. Harris, C. R. & Jenkins, M. Gender differences in risk assessment: why do women take fewer risks than men? Judgm. Decis. Mak. 1, 48–63 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  73. Idris, I. B. et al. Women’s autonomy in healthcare decision making: a systematic review. BMC Womens Health 23, 643 (2023). · DOI
  74. Glantz, M. J. et al. Gender disparity in the rate of partner abandonment in patients with serious medical illness. Cancer 115, 5237–5242 (2009). · DOI
  75. Shah, S. G., Robinson, I. & AlShawi, S. Developing medical device technologies from users’ perspectives: a theoretical framework for involving users in the development process. Int. J. Technol. Assess. Health Care 25, 514–521 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  76. Dewan, M. C. et al. Global neurosurgery: the current capacity and deficit in the provision of essential neurosurgical care. Executive summary of the global neurosurgery initiative at the program in global surgery and social change. J. Neurosurg. 130, 1055–1064 (2018). · DOI
  77. Chaudhary, U. et al. Spelling interface using intracortical signals in a completely locked-in patient enabled via auditory neurofeedback training. Nat. Commun. 13, 1236 (2022).
  78. Jiang, H. et al. Short report: surgery for implantable brain-computer interface assisted by robotic navigation system. Acta Neurochir. 164, 2299–2302 (2022). · DOI
  79. Lee, M. et al. Graphene-electrode array for brain map remodeling of the cortical surface. NPG Asia Mater. 13, 65 (2021). · DOI
  80. Kennedy, P. R. & Bakay, R. A. Restoration of neural output from a paralyzed patient by a direct brain connection. Neuroreport 9, 1707–1711 (1998). · DOI
  81. Kennedy, P. R., Kirby, M. T., Moore, M. M., King, B. & Mallory, A. Computer control using human intracortical local field potentials. IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 12, 339–344 (2004). · DOI
  82. Kim, S. P., Simeral, J. D., Hochberg, L. R., Donoghue, J. P. & Black, M. J. Neural control of computer cursor velocity by decoding motor cortical spiking activity in humans with tetraplegia. J. Neural Eng. 5, 455–476 (2008). · DOI
  83. Truccolo, W., Friehs, G. M., Donoghue, J. P. & Hochberg, L. R. Primary motor cortex tuning to intended movement kinematics in humans with tetraplegia. J. Neurosci. 28, 1163–1178 (2008). · DOI
  84. Guenther, F. H. et al. A wireless brain-machine interface for real-time speech synthesis. PLoS One 4, e8218 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  85. Truccolo, W., Hochberg, L. R. & Donoghue, J. P. Collective dynamics in human and monkey sensorimotor cortex: predicting single neuron spikes. Nat. Neurosci. 13, 105–111 (2010). · DOI
  86. Brumberg, J. S., Wright, E. J., Andreasen, D. S., Guenther, F. H. & Kennedy, P. R. Classification of intended phoneme production from chronic intracortical microelectrode recordings in speech-motor cortex. Front. Neurosci. 5, 65 (2011).
  87. Chadwick, E. K. et al. Continuous neuronal ensemble control of simulated arm reaching by a human with tetraplegia. J. Neural Eng. 8, 034003 (2011). · DOI
  88. Kim, S. P. et al. Point-and-click cursor control with an intracortical neural interface system by humans with tetraplegia. IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 19, 193–203 (2011). · DOI
  89. Malik, W. Q., Truccolo, W., Brown, E. N. & Hochberg, L. R. Efficient decoding with steady-state Kalman filter in neural interface systems. IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 19, 25–34 (2011). · DOI
  90. Simeral, J. D., Kim, S. P., Black, M. J., Donoghue, J. P. & Hochberg, L. R. Neural control of cursor trajectory and click by a human with tetraplegia 1000 days after implant of an intracortical microelectrode array. J. Neural Eng. 8, 025027 (2011). · DOI · Paper page
  91. Ajiboye, A. B., Simeral, J. D., Donoghue, J. P., Hochberg, L. R. & Kirsch, R. F. Prediction of imagined single-joint movements in a person with high-level tetraplegia. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 59, 2755–2765 (2012). · DOI
  92. Jarosiewicz, B. et al. Advantages of closed-loop calibration in intracortical brain-computer interfaces for people with tetraplegia. J. Neural Eng. 10, 046012 (2013). · DOI
  93. Perge, J. A. et al. Intra-day signal instabilities affect decoding performance in an intracortical neural interface system. J. Neural Eng. 10, 036004 (2013). · DOI · Paper page
  94. Sarmah, E. & Kennedy, P. Detecting silent vocalizations in a locked-in subject. Neurosci. J. 2013, 594624 (2013). · DOI
  95. Shaikhouni, A., Donoghue, J. P. & Hochberg, L. R. Somatosensory responses in a human motor cortex. J. Neurophysiol. 109, 2192–2204 (2013). · DOI
  96. Andersen, R. A., Kellis, S., Klaes, C. & Aflalo, T. Toward more versatile and intuitive cortical brain-machine interfaces. Curr. Biol. 24, R885–R897 (2014). · DOI
  97. Homer, M. L. et al. Adaptive offset correction for intracortical brain-computer interfaces. IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 22, 239–248 (2014). · DOI
  98. Masse, N. Y. et al. Non-causal spike filtering improves decoding of movement intention for intracortical BCIs. J. Neurosci. Methods 236, 58–67 (2014). · DOI
  99. Perge, J. A. et al. Reliability of directional information in unsorted spikes and local field potentials recorded in human motor cortex. J. Neural Eng. 11, 046007 (2014). · DOI
  100. Bacher, D. et al. Neural point-and-click communication by a person with incomplete locked-in syndrome. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 29, 462–471 (2015). · DOI
  101. Gilja, V. et al. Clinical translation of a high-performance neural prosthesis. Nat. Med. 21, 1142–1145 (2015). · DOI · Paper page
  102. Klaes, C. et al. Hand shape representations in the human posterior parietal cortex. J. Neurosci. 35, 15466–15476 (2015). · DOI
  103. Malik, W. Q., Hochberg, L. R., Donoghue, J. P. & Brown, E. N. Modulation depth estimation and variable selection in state-space models for neural interfaces. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 62, 570–581 (2015). · DOI
  104. Pandarinath, C. et al. Neural population dynamics in human motor cortex during movements in people with ALS. eLife 4, e07436 (2015). · DOI
  105. Wodlinger, B. et al. Ten-dimensional anthropomorphic arm control in a human brain-machine interface: difficulties, solutions, and limitations. J. Neural Eng. 12, 016011 (2015). · DOI · Paper page
  106. Downey, J. E. et al. Blending of brain-machine interface and vision-guided autonomous robotics improves neuroprosthetic arm performance during grasping. J. Neuroeng. Rehabil. 13, 28 (2016). · DOI · Paper page
  107. Friedenberg, D. A. et al. Big data challenges in decoding cortical activity in a human with quadriplegia to inform a brain computer interface. Annu. Int. Conf. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Soc. 2016, 3084–3087 (2016).
  108. Jarosiewicz, B. et al. Retrospectively supervised click decoder calibration for self-calibrating point-and-click brain-computer interfaces. J. Physiol. Paris. 110, 382–391 (2016). · DOI
  109. Vansteensel, M. J. et al. Fully implanted brain-computer interface in a locked-in patient with ALS. N. Engl. J. Med. 375, 2060–2066 (2016). · DOI · Paper page
  110. Ajiboye, A. B. et al. Restoration of reaching and grasping movements through brain-controlled muscle stimulation in a person with tetraplegia: a proof-of-concept demonstration. Lancet 389, 1821–1830 (2017). · DOI · Paper page
  111. Downey, J. E. et al. Motor cortical activity changes during neuroprosthetic-controlled object interaction. Sci. Rep. 7, 16947 (2017). · DOI · Paper page
  112. Hiremath, S. V. et al. Human perception of electrical stimulation on the surface of somatosensory cortex. PLoS One 12, e0176020 (2017). · DOI · Paper page
  113. Willett, F. R. et al. Feedback control policies employed by people using intracortical brain-computer interfaces. J. Neural Eng. 14, 016001 (2017). · DOI
  114. Yang, Y. et al. Sensorimotor experience and verb-category mapping in human sensory, motor and parietal neurons. Cortex 92, 304–319 (2017). · DOI
  115. Zhang, C. Y. et al. Partially mixed selectivity in human posterior parietal association cortex. Neuron 95, 697–708.e4 (2017). · DOI
  116. Armenta Salas, M. et al. Proprioceptive and cutaneous sensations in humans elicited by intracortical microstimulation. eLife 7, e32904 (2018). · DOI · Paper page
  117. Brandman, D. M. et al. Robust closed-loop control of a cursor in a person with tetraplegia using Gaussian process regression. Neural Comput. 30, 2986–3008 (2018). · DOI
  118. Brandman, D. M. et al. Rapid calibration of an intracortical brain-computer interface for people with tetraplegia. J. Neural Eng. 15, 026007 (2018). · DOI
  119. Colachis, S. C. T. et al. Dexterous control of seven functional hand movements using cortically-controlled transcutaneous muscle stimulation in a person with tetraplegia. Front. Neurosci. 12, 208 (2018). · DOI
  120. Downey, J. E., Schwed, N., Chase, S. M., Schwartz, A. B. & Collinger, J. L. Intracortical recording stability in human brain-computer interface users. J. Neural Eng. 15, 046016 (2018). · DOI · Paper page
  121. Downey, J. E. et al. Implicit grasp force representation in human motor cortical recordings. Front. Neurosci. 12, 801 (2018). · DOI
  122. Even-Chen, N. et al. Feasibility of automatic error detect-and-undo system in human intracortical brain-computer interfaces. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 65, 1771–1784 (2018). · DOI
  123. Milekovic, T. et al. Stable long-term BCI-enabled communication in ALS and locked-in syndrome using LFP signals. J. Neurophysiol. 120, 343–360 (2018). · DOI
  124. Schwemmer, M. A. et al. Meeting brain-computer interface user performance expectations using a deep neural network decoding framework. Nat. Med. 24, 1669–1676 (2018). · DOI
  125. Skomrock, N. D. et al. A characterization of brain-computer interface performance trade-offs using support vector machines and deep neural networks to decode movement intent. Front. Neurosci. 12, 763 (2018). · DOI
  126. Stavisky, S. D. et al. Brain-machine interface cursor position only weakly affects monkey and human motor cortical activity in the absence of arm movements. Sci. Rep. 8, 16357 (2018). · DOI
  127. Vargas-Irwin, C. E. et al. Watch, imagine, attempt: motor cortex single-unit activity reveals context-dependent movement encoding in humans with tetraplegia. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 12, 450 (2018). · DOI
  128. Willett, F. R. et al. A comparison of intention estimation methods for decoder calibration in intracortical brain-computer interfaces. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 65, 2066–2078 (2018). · DOI
  129. Young, D. et al. Signal processing methods for reducing artifacts in microelectrode brain recordings caused by functional electrical stimulation. J. Neural Eng. 15, 026014 (2018). · DOI
  130. Zhang, M. et al. Extracting wavelet based neural features from human intracortical recordings for neuroprosthetics applications. Bioelectron. Med. 4, 11 (2018). · DOI
  131. Andersen, R. A., Aflalo, T. & Kellis, S. From thought to action: the brain-machine interface in posterior parietal cortex. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 26274–26279 (2019). · DOI
  132. Annetta, N. V. et al. A high definition noninvasive neuromuscular electrical stimulation system for cortical control of combinatorial rotary hand movements in a human with tetraplegia. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 66, 910–919 (2019). · DOI
  133. Bockbrader, M. et al. Clinically significant gains in skillful grasp coordination by an individual with tetraplegia using an implanted brain-computer interface with forearm transcutaneous muscle stimulation. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 100, 1201–1217 (2019). · DOI
  134. Milekovic, T. et al. Volitional control of single-electrode high gamma local field potentials by people with paralysis. J. Neurophysiol. 121, 1428–1450 (2019). · DOI
  135. Pels, E. G. M. et al. Stability of a chronic implanted brain-computer interface in late-stage amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Clin. Neurophysiol. 130, 1798–1803 (2019). · DOI
  136. Saif-Ur-Rehman, M. et al. SpikeDeeptector: a deep-learning based method for detection of neural spiking activity. J. Neural Eng. 16, 056003 (2019). · DOI
  137. Sakellaridi, S. et al. Intrinsic variable learning for brain-machine interface control by human anterior intraparietal cortex. Neuron 102, 694–705.e3 (2019). · DOI
  138. Stavisky, S. D. et al. Neural ensemble dynamics in dorsal motor cortex during speech in people with paralysis. eLife 8, e46015 (2019). · DOI · Paper page
  139. Weiss, J. M., Flesher, S. N., Franklin, R., Collinger, J. L. & Gaunt, R. A. Artifact-free recordings in human bidirectional brain-computer interfaces. J. Neural Eng. 16, 016002 (2019). · DOI
  140. Willett, F. R. et al. Principled BCI decoder design and parameter selection using a feedback control model. Sci. Rep. 9, 8881 (2019). · DOI
  141. Young, D. et al. Closed-loop cortical control of virtual reach and posture using Cartesian and joint velocity commands. J. Neural Eng. 16, 026011 (2019). · DOI
  142. Aflalo, T. et al. A shared neural substrate for action verbs and observed actions in human posterior parietal cortex. Sci. Adv. 6, eabb3984 (2020). · DOI
  143. Downey, J. E. et al. The motor cortex has independent representations for ipsilateral and contralateral arm movements but correlated representations for grasping. Cereb. Cortex 30, 5400–5409 (2020). · DOI
  144. Eichenlaub, J. B. et al. Replay of learned neural firing sequences during rest in human motor cortex. Cell Rep. 31, 107581 (2020). · DOI
  145. Even-Chen, N. et al. Power-saving design opportunities for wireless intracortical brain-computer interfaces. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 4, 984–996 (2020). · DOI · Paper page
  146. Ganzer, P. D. et al. Restoring the sense of touch using a sensorimotor demultiplexing neural interface. Cell 181, 763–773.e12 (2020). · DOI · Paper page
  147. Jafari, M. et al. The human primary somatosensory cortex encodes imagined movement in the absence of sensory information. Commun. Biol. 3, 757 (2020). · DOI
  148. Jorge, A., Royston, D. A., Tyler-Kabara, E. C., Boninger, M. L. & Collinger, J. L. Classification of individual finger movements using intracortical recordings in human motor cortex. Neurosurgery 87, 630–638 (2020). · DOI
  149. Leinders, S. et al. Dorsolateral prefrontal cortex-based control with an implanted brain-computer interface. Sci. Rep. 10, 15448 (2020). · DOI
  150. Quick, K. M., Weiss, J. M., Clemente, F., Gaunt, R. A. & Collinger, J. L. Intracortical microstimulation feedback improves grasp force accuracy in a human using a brain-computer interface. Annu. Int. Conf. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Soc. 2020, 3355–3358 (2020).
  151. Rastogi, A. et al. Neural representation of observed, imagined, and attempted grasping force in motor cortex of individuals with chronic tetraplegia. Sci. Rep. 10, 1429 (2020).
  152. Weiss, J. M., Gaunt, R. A., Franklin, R., Boninger, M. L. & Collinger, J. L. Demonstration of a portable intracortical brain-computer interface. Brain Comput. Interfaces 6, 106–117 (2020). · DOI
  153. Wilson, G. H. et al. Decoding spoken English from intracortical electrode arrays in dorsal precentral gyrus. J. Neural Eng. 17, 066007 (2020). · DOI · Paper page
  154. Zhang, C. Y. et al. Preservation of partially mixed selectivity in human posterior parietal cortex across changes in task context. eNeuro https://doi.org/10.1523/ENEURO.0222-19.2019 (2020). · DOI
  155. Bashford, L. et al. The neurophysiological representation of imagined somatosensory percepts in human cortex. J. Neurosci. 41, 2177–2185 (2021). · DOI
  156. Cajigas, I. et al. Implantable brain-computer interface for neuroprosthetic-enabled volitional hand grasp restoration in spinal cord injury. Brain Commun. 3, fcab248 (2021). · DOI
  157. Chivukula, S. et al. Neural encoding of actual and imagined touch within human posterior parietal cortex. eLife 10, e61646 (2021). · DOI
  158. Dekleva, B. M., Weiss, J. M., Boninger, M. L. & Collinger, J. L. Generalizable cursor click decoding using grasp-related neural transients. J. Neural Eng. 18, 0460e9 (2021). · DOI
  159. Deo, D. R. et al. Effects of peripheral haptic feedback on intracortical brain-computer interface control and associated sensory responses in motor cortex. IEEE Trans. Haptics 14, 762–775 (2021). · DOI
  160. Hosman, T. et al. Auditory cues reveal intended movement information in middle frontal gyrus neuronal ensemble activity of a person with tetraplegia. Sci. Rep. 11, 98 (2021). · DOI
  161. Hughes, C. L. et al. Perception of microstimulation frequency in human somatosensory cortex. eLife 10, e65128 (2021).
  162. Hughes, C. L. et al. Neural stimulation and recording performance in human sensorimotor cortex over 1500 days. J. Neural Eng. 18, 045012 (2021). · DOI
  163. Larzabal, C. et al. The Riemannian spatial pattern method: mapping and clustering movement imagery using Riemannian geometry. J. Neural Eng. 18, 056014 (2021). · DOI
  164. Larzabal, C. et al. Long-term stability of the chronic epidural wireless recorder WIMAGINE in tetraplegic patients. J. Neural Eng. 18, 056026 (2021). · DOI · Paper page
  165. McMullen, D. P. et al. Novel intraoperative online functional mapping of somatosensory finger representations for targeted stimulating electrode placement: technical note. J. Neurosurg. 135, 1493–1500 (2021).
  166. Osborn, L. E. et al. Intracortical microstimulation of somatosensory cortex enables object identification through perceived sensations. Annu. Int. Conf. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Soc. 2021, 6259–6262 (2021).
  167. Rastogi, A. et al. The neural representation of force across grasp types in motor cortex of humans with tetraplegia. eNeuro https://doi.org/10.1523/ENEURO.0231-20.2020 (2021). · DOI
  168. Ting, J. E. et al. Sensing and decoding the neural drive to paralyzed muscles during attempted movements of a person with tetraplegia using a sleeve array. J. Neurophysiol. 126, 2104–2118 (2021). · DOI
  169. Aflalo, T. et al. Implicit mechanisms of intention. Curr. Biol. 32, 2051–2060.e6 (2022). · DOI
  170. Cajigas, I. et al. Brain-computer interface control of stepping from invasive electrocorticography upper-limb motor imagery in a patient with quadriplegia. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 16, 1077416 (2022). · DOI
  171. Christie, B. et al. Perceived timing of cutaneous vibration and intracortical microstimulation of human somatosensory cortex. Brain Stimul. 15, 881–888 (2022). · DOI
  172. Fifer, M. S. et al. Intracortical somatosensory stimulation to elicit fingertip sensations in an individual with spinal cord injury. Neurology 98, e679–e687 (2022). · DOI · Paper page
  173. Ganesh, A., Cervantes, A. J. & Kennedy, P. R. Slow firing single units are essential for optimal decoding of silent speech. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 16, 874199 (2022). · DOI
  174. Guan, C. et al. Stability of motor representations after paralysis. eLife 11, e74478 (2022). · DOI
  175. Handelman, D. A. et al. Shared control of bimanual robotic limbs with a brain-machine interface for self-feeding. Front. Neurorobot 16, 918001 (2022). · DOI
  176. Kennedy, P. & Cervantes, A. J. Recruitment and differential firing patterns of single units during conditioning to a tone in a mute locked-in human. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 16, 864983 (2022). · DOI
  177. Metzger, S. L. et al. Generalizable spelling using a speech neuroprosthesis in an individual with severe limb and vocal paralysis. Nat. Commun. 13, 6510 (2022). · DOI · Paper page
  178. Nickl, R. W. et al. Characteristics and stability of sensorimotor activity driven by isolated-muscle group activation in a human with tetraplegia. Sci. Rep. 12, 10353 (2022). · DOI
  179. Qi, Y. et al. Dynamic ensemble Bayesian filter for robust control of a human brain-machine interface. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 69, 3825–3835 (2022). · DOI
  180. Rouanne, V., Costecalde, T., Benabid, A. L. & Aksenova, T. Unsupervised adaptation of an ECoG based brain-computer interface using neural correlates of task performance. Sci. Rep. 12, 21316 (2022). · DOI
  181. Rubin, D. B. et al. Learned motor patterns are replayed in human motor cortex during sleep. J. Neurosci. 42, 5007–5020 (2022). · DOI · Paper page
  182. Serruya, M. D. et al. Neuromotor prosthetic to treat stroke-related paresis: N-of-1 trial. Commun. Med. 2, 37 (2022). · DOI
  183. Śliwowski, M., Martin, M., Souloumiac, A., Blanchart, P. & Aksenova, T. Decoding ECoG signal into 3D hand translation using deep learning. J. Neural Eng. 19, 026023 (2022). · DOI
  184. Wandelt, S. K. et al. Decoding grasp and speech signals from the cortical grasp circuit in a tetraplegic human. Neuron 110, 1777–1787.e3 (2022). · DOI
  185. Balasubramanian, K., Arce-McShane, F. I., Dekleva, B. M., Collinger, J. L. & Hatsopoulos, N. G. Propagating motor cortical patterns of excitability are ubiquitous across human and non-human primate movement initiation. iScience 26, 106518 (2023). · DOI
  186. Bashford, L. et al. Neural subspaces of imagined movements in parietal cortex remain stable over several years in humans. J. Neural Eng. 21, 046059 (2024). · DOI
  187. Dekleva, B. M. et al. Motor cortex retains and reorients neural dynamics during motor imagery. Nat. Hum. Behav. 8, 729–742 (2024). · DOI · Paper page
  188. Greenspon, C. M. et al. Tessellation of artificial touch via microstimulation of human somatosensory cortex. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.06.23.545425 (2023). · DOI
  189. Greenspon, C. M. et al. Biomimetic multi-channel microstimulation of somatosensory cortex conveys high resolution force feedback for bionic hands. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.02.18.528972 (2023). · DOI
  190. Guan, C. et al. Decoding and geometry of ten finger movements in human posterior parietal cortex and motor cortex. J. Neural Eng. 20, 036020 (2023). · DOI
  191. Noel, J. P. et al. Human primary motor cortex indexes the onset of subjective intention in brain-machine-interface mediated actions. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.07.21.550067 (2023). · DOI
  192. Rosenthal, I. A. et al. S1 represents multisensory contexts and somatotopic locations within and outside the bounds of the cortical homunculus. Cell Rep. 42, 112312 (2023). · DOI
  193. Sliwowski, M., Martin, M., Souloumiac, A., Blanchart, P. & Aksenova, T. Impact of dataset size and long-term ECoG-based BCI usage on deep learning decoders performance. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 17, 1111645 (2023). · DOI
  194. Herring, E. Z. et al. Reconnecting the hand and arm to the brain: efficacy of neural interfaces for sensorimotor restoration after tetraplegia. Neurosurgery 94, 864–874 (2024).

Metadata

Authors
Patrick-Krueger, K. M., Burkhart, I., & Contreras-Vidal, J. L.
Venue
Nature Reviews Bioengineering
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2024-09-20
Volume
3
Issue
1
Pages
50-67
ISSN
2731-6092
DOI
10.1038/s44222-024-00239-5
Cited by
125
References
25
Language
en
Licence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The state of clinical trials of implantable brain–computer interfaces. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/s44222-024-00239-5
The paper
Patrick-Krueger, K. M., Burkhart, I., & Contreras-Vidal, J. L. (2024). The state of clinical trials of implantable brain–computer interfaces. Nature Reviews Bioengineering. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44222-024-00239-5