Cited by 649EEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringMotor Control and Adaptation

Decoding motor imagery from the posterior parietal cortex of a tetraplegic human

Open access
Aflalo, Tyson, Kellis, Spencer, Klaes, Christian, Lee, Brian, Shi, Ying, Pejsa, Kelsie, Shanfield, Kathleen, Hayes-Jackson, Stephanie +4 more·2015·Science

Abstract

Brain imagination to control external devices: Studies in monkeys have implicated the brain's posterior parietal cortex in high-level coding of planned and imagined actions. Aflalo et al. implanted two microelectrode arrays in the posterior parietal cortex of a tetraplegic patient (see the Perspective by Pruszynski and Diedrichsen). They asked the patient to imagine various types of limb or eye movements. As predicted, motor imagery involved the same types of neural population activity involved in actual movements, which could potentially be exploited in prosthetic limb control. Science , this issue p. 906 ; see also p. 860

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 · 10.1126/science.aaa5417

Cites

27 of 27 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?

  • Earlier intracortical studies found that after paralysis, motor cortex still encodes intended reaching, grasping, and cursor movements.

    “Prior BCI studies have shown that the motor intention for gross motor skills, such as reaching, grasping or moving a computer cursor, remains neurally encoded in motor cortex after paralysis1–7.”

    From High-performance brain-to-text communication via handwriting (2021) · cites this paper as [3]

    The passage comparing this study with previous human M1 recordings (indexed section labeled Abstract; page unavailable) reports that those studies decoded movement trajectories, supporting the motor-cortex portion in part. This paper’s own recordings of imagined reaching, grasping, and cursor control were from the posterior parietal cortex of a tetraplegic participant, not motor cortex. It does not establish that the earlier motor-cortex studies demonstrated all three movements named in the claim. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • UEAs have been successfully implanted in human subjects in numerous studies and these devices have continued to work for many years.

    “Although the duration of this study was limited to 6 months, UEAs have been successfully implanted in human subjects in numerous studies (25-29) and these devices have continued to work for many years.”

    From Visual percepts evoked with an intracortical 96-channel microelectrode array inserted in human occipital cortex (2021) · cites this paper as [26]

    The Abstract (page unavailable) reports successful implantation of two microelectrode arrays in one human subject, with recordings for more than 21 months and no device-related adverse events. This supports the paper as one example of human implantation, but it does not establish that the devices continued to work for many years. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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
Aflalo, T., Kellis, S., Klaes, C., Lee, B., Shi, Y., Pejsa, K., Shanfield, K., Hayes-Jackson, S., Aisen, M., Heck, C., Liu, C., & Andersen, R. A.
Affiliations
  • California Institute of Technology (US)
  • University of Southern California (US)
  • Rancho Los Amigos National Rehabilitation Center (US)
Corresponding author
  • Aflalo, Tyson
  • Kellis, Spencer
  • Andersen, Richard A.
Venue
Science
Published
2015-05-22
Volume
348
Issue
6237
Pages
906-910
ISSN
  • 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
  • 1095-9203
OpenAlex
W1804209253
Cited by
649
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 25 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 41 · 2023: 85 · 2022: 62 · 2021: 55 · 2020: 49 · 2019: 72 · 2018: 70 · 2017: 79 · 2016: 49 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 1
FWCI
44.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • CaltechAUTHORS (California Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • NIH (EY013337, EY015545, P50 MH942581A)
  • University of Southern California
  • Boswell Foundation
  • Defense Department (N66001-10-4056)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
Keywords
motor imagery decoding, posterior parietal cortex, tetraplegia, brain-computer interface, neural population activity, microelectrode arrays, action planning, neuroprosthetics, paralyzed patients
MeSH terms
Cognition, Electrodes, Implanted, Humans, Microelectrodes, Motor Activity, Movement, Neurons, Parietal Lobe, Quadriplegia, Neural Prostheses, Functional Neuroimaging, 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