MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210725176 · doi:10.1093/braincomms/fcac008

Aphasia recovery by language training using a brain–computer interface: a proof-of-concept study

2022· article· en· W4210725176 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain Communications · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
FundersDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsAphasiaBrain–computer interfaceTask (project management)Session (web analytics)RehabilitationStroke (engine)Computer scienceNeuroplasticityElectroencephalographyInterface (matter)Brain activity and meditationSpeech recognitionPhysical medicine and rehabilitationCognitive psychologyPsychologyAudiologyMedicineNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aphasia, the impairment to understand or produce language, is a frequent disorder after stroke with devastating effects. Conventional speech and language therapy include each formal intervention for improving language and communication abilities. In the chronic stage after stroke, it is effective compared with no treatment, but its effect size is small. We present a new language training approach for the rehabilitation of patients with aphasia based on a brain-computer interface system. The approach exploits its capacity to provide feedback time-locked to a brain state. Thus, it implements the idea that reinforcing an appropriate language processing strategy may induce beneficial brain plasticity. In our approach, patients perform a simple auditory target word detection task whilst their EEG was recorded. The constant decoding of these signals by machine learning models generates an individual and immediate brain-state-dependent feedback. It indicates to patients how well they accomplish the task during a training session, even if they are unable to speak. Results obtained from a proof-of-concept study with 10 stroke patients with mild to severe chronic aphasia (age range: 38-76 years) are remarkable. First, we found that the high-intensity training (30 h, 4 days per week) was feasible, despite a high-word presentation speed and unfavourable stroke-induced EEG signal characteristics. Second, the training induced a sustained recovery of aphasia, which generalized to multiple language aspects beyond the trained task. Specifically, all tested language assessments (Aachen Aphasia Test, Snodgrass & Vanderwart, Communicative Activity Log) showed significant medium to large improvements between pre- and post-training, with a standardized mean difference of 0.63 obtained for the Aachen Aphasia Test, and five patients categorized as non-aphasic at post-training assessment. Third, our data show that these language improvements were accompanied neither by significant changes in attention skills nor non-linguistic skills. Investigating possible modes of action of this brain-computer interface-based language training, neuroimaging data (EEG and resting-state functional MRI) indicates a training-induced faster word processing, a strengthened language network and a rebalancing between the language- and default mode networks.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.396
Threshold uncertainty score0.966

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.089
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it