Challenges of brain-computer interface facilitated cognitive assessment for children with cerebral palsy

Abstract

Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) have been successfully used by adults, but little information is available on BCI use by children, especially children with severe multiple impairments who may need technology to facilitate communication. Here we discuss the challenges of using non-invasive BCI with children, especially children who do not have another established method of communication with unfamiliar partners. Strategies to manage these challenges require consideration of multiple factors related to accessibility, cognition, and participation. These factors include decisions regarding where (home, clinic, or lab) participation will take place, the number of sessions involved, and the degree of participation necessary for success. A strategic approach to addressing the unique challenges inherent in BCI use by children with disabilities will increase the potential for successful BCI calibration and adoption of BCI as a valuable access method for children with the most significant impairments in movement and communication.

Individualized Electrode Subset Improves the Calibration Accuracy of an EEG P300-design Brain-Computer Interface for People with Severe Cerebral Palsy

“…In Protocol 2, usable BCI calibration data from 24 participants with severe CP (16 females and 8 males, age 18.3±8.4 years) were obtained. Participants were part of a study comparing access to a multiple-choice test with BCI-access and eye-gaze-interface-access [22]. The Institutional Review Board of the University of Michigan approved the protocol (HUM00130187) as did the Cerebral Palsy Alliance Human Research Ethics Committee (approval number: 2017_05_02).…”

“…Data in Protocol 1 was collected from participants with mild CP and typically developing controls, described in Alcaide et al [20] and Warchausky et al [21]. Protocol 2 involved participants with severe CP, described in [22]. In particular, participants in Protocol 1 were required to have sufficient physical abilities to take the standard, paper version of a forced-choice vocabulary test.…”

“…In Protocol 2, usable BCI calibration data from 24 participants with severe CP (16 females and 8 males, age 18.3±8.4 years) were obtained. Participants were part of a study comparing access to a multiple-choice test with BCI-access and eye-gaze-interfaceaccess [22] human participants, a parent, or guardian. The participants for this study were required to be unable to access the paper version of the multiple-choice test.…”

“…For protocol 1, the training vocabulary pictures were selected to mimic the PPVT, but to not include words in the actual PPVT and to be relatively simple illustrations of words that we expected participants to recognize. For protocol 2, pictures were chosen in coordination with our collaborators in Australia to select words and illustrations that would be familiar to participants in both countries [22].…”