Cited by 578EEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringGaze Tracking and Assistive Technology

Fully Implanted Brain–Computer Interface in a Locked-In Patient with ALS

Open access
Vansteensel, Mariska J., Pels, Elmar G.M., Bleichner, Martin G., Branco, Mariana P., Denison, Timothy, Freudenburg, Zachary V., Gosselaar, Peter, Leinders, Sacha +5 more·2016·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

Options for people with severe paralysis who have lost the ability to communicate orally are limited. We describe a method for communication in a patient with late-stage amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), involving a fully implanted brain-computer interface that consists of subdural electrodes placed over the motor cortex and a transmitter placed subcutaneously in the left side of the thorax. By attempting to move the hand on the side opposite the implanted electrodes, the patient accurately and independently controlled a computer typing program 28 weeks after electrode placement, at the equivalent of two letters per minute. The brain-computer interface offered autonomous communication that supplemented and at times supplanted the patient's eye-tracking device. (Funded by the Government of the Netherlands and the European Union; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02224469 .).

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 · 10.1056/nejmoa1608085

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The median real-time text-decoding rate exceeded the participant's typical assistive-device communication rate of 14.2 words per minute and was closer to naturalistic speaking rates than previously reported communication neuroprostheses.

    “This decoding rate exceeds our participant’s typical communication rate using her assistive device (14.2 WPM; Supplementary Note 2) and is closer to naturalistic speaking rates than has been previously reported with communication neuroprostheses1,3,7–9.”
  • EEG spellers based on oddball potentials or motor imagery usually achieve 1-5 characters per minute.

    “EEG spellers based on oddball potentials or motor imagery typically achieve 1–5 characters per minute28–32.”

    From High-performance brain-to-text communication via handwriting (2021) · cites this paper as [28]

    The Results section, “Communication and Independent Home Use” (page unavailable), reports spelling times for one patient using a fully implanted interface. Our copy does not give a typical rate for EEG spellers based on oddball potentials or motor imagery; searches for those methods and their characters-per-minute rates found no such passage. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • It may be hard to obtain sufficiently large patient populations for concrete and statistically significant conclusions.

    “Additionally, it is apparent from previous work that access to sufficiently large patient populations for concrete and statistically significant conclusions may be difficult to obtain (1–5, 8, 11, 29, 39).”
  • Another contributing factor to successful SMR enhancement might have been the implementation of an "incremental learning" approach where open-loop, closed-loop, and application training followed each other throughout training.

    “Related to this, another contributing factor to successful SMR enhancement might have been that we have implemented an “incremental learning” approach as advocated in [53] and shown in [69], where open-loop, closed-loop, and application training (tasks of increasing difficulty) followed each other throughout training.”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vansteensel, M. J., Pels, E. G. M., Bleichner, M. G., Branco, M. P., Denison, T., Freudenburg, Z. V., Gosselaar, P., Leinders, S., Ottens, T. H., Van Den Boom, M. A., Van Rijen, P. C., Aarnoutse, E. J., & Ramsey, N. F.
Affiliations
Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg (DE)
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2016-11-24
Volume
375
Issue
21
Pages
2060-2066
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2549587034
Cited by
578
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 56 · 2025: 71 · 2024: 57 · 2023: 65 · 2022: 43 · 2021: 75 · 2020: 76 · 2019: 52 · 2018: 48 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 2
FWCI
28.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • New England Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion)
  • Carl von Ossiezky University of Oldenburg (submittedVersion)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Gaze Tracking and Assistive Technology
Keywords
brain-computer interface, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, locked-in syndrome, subdural electrodes, motor cortex, augmentative and alternative communication, eye tracking, severe paralysis, computer typing
MeSH terms
Neurological Rehabilitation, Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, Aphonia, Communication Devices for People with Disabilities, Communication Aids for Disabled, Electrodes, Implanted, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Motor Cortex, Quadriplegia, Brain-Computer Interfaces

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