↓ Skip to main content

Decoding of Ankle Flexion and Extension from Cortical Current Sources Estimated from Non-invasive Brain Activity Recording Methods

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Decoding of Ankle Flexion and Extension from Cortical Current Sources Estimated from Non-invasive Brain Activity Recording Methods
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2018
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2017.00733
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alejandra Mejia Tobar, Rikiya Hyoudou, Kahori Kita, Tatsuhiro Nakamura, Hiroyuki Kambara, Yousuke Ogata, Takashi Hanakawa, Yasuharu Koike, Natsue Yoshimura

Abstract

The classification of ankle movements from non-invasive brain recordings can be applied to a brain-computer interface (BCI) to control exoskeletons, prosthesis, and functional electrical stimulators for the benefit of patients with walking impairments. In this research, ankle flexion and extension tasks at two force levels in both legs, were classified from cortical current sources estimated by a hierarchical variational Bayesian method, using electroencephalography (EEG) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) recordings. The hierarchical prior for the current source estimation from EEG was obtained from activated brain areas and their intensities from an fMRI group (second-level) analysis. The fMRI group analysis was performed on regions of interest defined over the primary motor cortex, the supplementary motor area, and the somatosensory area, which are well-known to contribute to movement control. A sparse logistic regression method was applied for a nine-class classification (eight active tasks and a resting control task) obtaining a mean accuracy of 65.64% for time series of current sources, estimated from the EEG and the fMRI signals using a variational Bayesian method, and a mean accuracy of 22.19% for the classification of the pre-processed of EEG sensor signals, with a chance level of 11.11%. The higher classification accuracy of current sources, when compared to EEG classification accuracy, was attributed to the high number of sources and the different signal patterns obtained in the same vertex for different motor tasks. Since the inverse filter estimation for current sources can be done offline with the present method, the present method is applicable to real-time BCIs. Finally, due to the highly enhanced spatial distribution of current sources over the brain cortex, this method has the potential to identify activation patterns to design BCIs for the control of an affected limb in patients with stroke, or BCIs from motor imagery in patients with spinal cord injury.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 91 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 14%
Student > Bachelor 12 13%
Researcher 8 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 4%
Other 7 8%
Unknown 28 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 13 14%
Neuroscience 11 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 8%
Computer Science 6 7%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 41 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 June 2018.
All research outputs
#16,725,651
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#7,427
of 11,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#271,203
of 449,895 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#139
of 207 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,542 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 449,895 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 207 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.