Combining brain-computer interfaces and assistive technologies: state-of-the-art and challenges

In recent years, new research has brought the field of EEG-based Brain-Computer Interfacing (BCI) out of its infancy and into a phase of relative maturity through many demonstrated prototypes such as brain-controlled wheelchairs, keyboards, and computer games. With this proof-of-concept phase in the past, the time is now ripe to focus on the development of practical BCI technologies that can be brought out of the lab and into real-world applications. In particular, we focus on the prospect of improving the lives of countless disabled individuals through a combination of BCI technology with existing assistive technologies (AT). In pursuit of more practical BCIs for use outside of the lab, in this paper, we identify four application areas where disabled individuals could greatly benefit from advancements in BCI technology, namely,“Communication and Control”, “Motor Substitution”, “Entertainment”, and “Motor Recovery”. We review the current state of the art and possible future developments, while discussing the main research issues in these four areas. In particular, we expect the most progress in the development of technologies such as hybrid BCI architectures, user-machine adaptation algorithms, the exploitation of users’ mental states for BCI reliability and confidence measures, the incorporation of principles in human-computer interaction (HCI) to improve BCI usability, and the development of novel BCI technology including better EEG devices

BNCI systems as a potential assistive technology: ethical issues and participatory research in the BrainAble project

This paper highlights aspects related to current research and thinking about ethical issues in relation to Brain Computer Interface (BCI) and Brain-Neuronal Computer Interfaces (BNCI) research through the experience of one particular project, BrainAble, which is exploring and developing the potential of these technologies to enable people with complex disabilities to control computers. It describes how ethical practice has been developed both within the multidisciplinary research team and with participants. Results: The paper presents findings in which participants shared their views of the project prototypes, of the potential of BCI/BNCI systems as an assistive technology, and of their other possible applications. This draws attention to the importance of ethical practice in projects where high expectations of technologies, and representations of “ideal types” of disabled users may reinforce stereotypes or drown out participant “voices”. Conclusions: Ethical frameworks for research and development in emergent areas such as BCI/BNCI systems should be based on broad notions of a “duty of care” while being sufficiently flexible that researchers can adapt project procedures according to participant needs. They need to be frequently revisited, not only in the light of experience, but also to ensure they reflect new research findings and ever more complex and powerful technologies

How a Diverse Research Ecosystem Has Generated New Rehabilitation Technologies: Review of NIDILRR’s Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers

Over 50 million United States citizens (1 in 6 people in the US) have a developmental, acquired, or degenerative disability. The average US citizen can expect to live 20% of his or her life with a disability. Rehabilitation technologies play a major role in improving the quality of life for people with a disability, yet widespread and highly challenging needs remain. Within the US, a major effort aimed at the creation and evaluation of rehabilitation technology has been the Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers (RERCs) sponsored by the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research. As envisioned at their conception by a panel of the National Academy of Science in 1970, these centers were intended to take a “total approach to rehabilitation”, combining medicine, engineering, and related science, to improve the quality of life of individuals with a disability. Here, we review the scope, achievements, and ongoing projects of an unbiased sample of 19 currently active or recently terminated RERCs. Specifically, for each center, we briefly explain the needs it targets, summarize key historical advances, identify emerging innovations, and consider future directions. Our assessment from this review is that the RERC program indeed involves a multidisciplinary approach, with 36 professional fields involved, although 70% of research and development staff are in engineering fields, 23% in clinical fields, and only 7% in basic science fields; significantly, 11% of the professional staff have a disability related to their research. We observe that the RERC program has substantially diversified the scope of its work since the 1970’s, addressing more types of disabilities using more technologies, and, in particular, often now focusing on information technologies. RERC work also now often views users as integrated into an interdependent society through technologies that both people with and without disabilities co-use (such as the internet, wireless communication, and architecture). In addition, RERC research has evolved to view users as able at improving outcomes through learning, exercise, and plasticity (rather than being static), which can be optimally timed. We provide examples of rehabilitation technology innovation produced by the RERCs that illustrate this increasingly diversifying scope and evolving perspective. We conclude by discussing growth opportunities and possible future directions of the RERC program

Recent and upcoming BCI progress: overview, analysis, and recommendations

Brain–computer interfaces (BCIs) are finally moving out of the laboratory and beginning to gain acceptance in real-world situations. As BCIs gain attention with broader groups of users, including persons with different disabilities and healthy users, numerous practical questions gain importance. What are the most practical ways to detect and analyze brain activity in field settings? Which devices and applications are most useful for different people? How can we make BCIs more natural and sensitive, and how can BCI technologies improve usability? What are some general trends and issues, such as combining different BCIs or assessing and comparing performance? This book chapter provides an overview of the different sections of this book, providing a summary of how authors address these and other questions. We also present some predictions and recommendations that ensue from our experience from discussing these and other issues with our authors and other researchers and developers within the BCI community. We conclude that, although some directions are hard to predict, the field is definitely growing and changing rapidly, and will continue doing so in the next several years

JNER at 15 years: analysis of the state of neuroengineering and rehabilitation.

On JNER's 15th anniversary, this editorial analyzes the state of the field of neuroengineering and rehabilitation. I first discuss some ways that the nature of neurorehabilitation research has evolved in the past 15 years based on my perspective as editor-in-chief of JNER and a researcher in the field. I highlight increasing reliance on advanced technologies, improved rigor and openness of research, and three, related, new paradigms - wearable devices, the Cybathlon competition, and human augmentation studies - indicators that neurorehabilitation is squarely in the age of wearability. Then, I briefly speculate on how the field might make progress going forward, highlighting the need for new models of training and learning driven by big data, better personalization and targeting, and an increase in the quantity and quality of usability and uptake studies to improve translation