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.
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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Data-Driven Transducer Design and Identification for Internally-Paced Motor Brain Computer Interfaces: A Review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neuroscience, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnins.2018.00540 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marie-Caroline Schaeffer, Tetiana Aksenova |
| Abstract |
Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCIs) are systems that establish a direct communication pathway between the users' brain activity and external effectors. They offer the potential to improve the quality of life of motor-impaired patients. Motor BCIs aim to permit severely motor-impaired users to regain limb mobility by controlling orthoses or prostheses. In particular, motor BCI systems benefit patients if the decoded actions reflect the users' intentions with an accuracy that enables them to efficiently interact with their environment. One of the main challenges of BCI systems is to adapt the BCI's signal translation blocks to the user to reach a high decoding accuracy. This paper will review the literature of data-driven and user-specific transducer design and identification approaches and it focuses on internally-paced motor BCIs. In particular, continuous kinematic biomimetic and mental-task decoders are reviewed. Furthermore, static and dynamic decoding approaches, linear and non-linear decoding, offline and real-time identification algorithms are considered. The current progress and challenges related to the design of clinical-compatible motor BCI transducers are additionally discussed. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 47 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 11% |
| Researcher | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Unknown | 8 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 15 | 32% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 9% |
| Psychology | 4 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 17% |
| Unknown | 11 | 23% |
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 28 August 2018.
All research outputs
#15,526,423
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#6,609
of 11,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,107
of 340,605 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#150
of 237 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 340,605 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 237 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.