Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 299

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Large Clinical Study on the Ability of Stroke Patients to Use an EEG-Based Motor Imagery Brain-Computer Interface

Ang, Kai Keng, Guan, Cuntai, Chua, Karen Sui Geok, Ang, Beng Ti, Kuah, Christopher Wee Keong, Wang, Chuanchu, Phua, Kok Soon, Chin, Zheng Yang, Zhang, Haihong·2011·Clinical EEG and Neuroscience

Abstract

Brain-computer interface (BCI) technology has the prospects of helping stroke survivors by enabling the interaction with their environment through brain signals rather than through muscles, and restoring motor function by inducing activity-dependent brain plasticity. This paper presents a clinical study on the extent of detectable brain signals from a large population of stroke patients in using EEG-based motor imagery BCI. EEG data were collected from 54 stroke patients whereby finger tapping and motor imagery of the stroke-affected hand were performed by 8 and 46 patients, respectively. EEG data from 11 patients who gave further consent to perform motor imagery were also collected for second calibration and third independent test sessions conducted on separate days. Off-line accuracies of classifying the two classes of EEG from finger tapping or motor imagery of the stroke-affected hand versus the EEG from background rest were then assessed and compared to 16 healthy subjects. The mean off-line accuracy of detecting motor imagery by the 46 patients ( μ=0.74) was significantly lower than finger tapping by 8 patients ( μ=0.87, p=0.008), but not significantly lower than motor imagery by healthy subjects ( μ=0.78, p=0.23). Six stroke patients performed motor imagery at chance level, and no correlation was found between the accuracies of detecting motor imagery and their motor impairment in terms of Fugl-Meyer Assessment ( p=0.29). The off-line accuracies of the 11 patients in the second session ( μ=0.76) were not significantly different from the first session ( μ=0.72, p=0.16), or from the on-line accuracies of the third independent test session ( μ=0.82, p=0.14). Hence this study showed that the majority of stroke patients could use EEG-based motor imagery BCI.

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 · 10.1177/155005941104200411

Cites

35 of 35 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 35 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2009.02.004 · doi:10.1016/j.compbiomed.2009.02.004
  2. Ang KK, 2011, Pattern Recogn

Cited by

See all 299

Metadata

Authors
Ang, K. K., Guan, C., Chua, K. S. G., Ang, B. T., Kuah, C. W. K., Wang, C., Phua, K. S., Chin, Z. Y., & Zhang, H.
Venue
Clinical EEG and Neuroscience
Published
2011-10
Volume
42
Issue
4
Pages
253-258
ISSN
  • 1550-0594 (ISSN-L)
  • 2169-5202
OpenAlex
W2158573165
Cited by
299
References
35
FWCI
11.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)

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: A Large Clinical Study on the Ability of Stroke Patients to Use an EEG-Based Motor Imagery Brain-Computer Interface. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/155005941104200411
The paper
Ang, K. K., Guan, C., Chua, K. S. G., Ang, B. T., Kuah, C. W. K., Wang, C., Phua, K. S., Chin, Z. Y., & Zhang, H. (2011). A Large Clinical Study on the Ability of Stroke Patients to Use an EEG-Based Motor Imagery Brain-Computer Interface. Clinical EEG and Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1177/155005941104200411

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.