Fatigue in children using motor imagery and P300 brain-computer interfaces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Brain-computer interface (BCI) technology offers children with quadriplegic cerebral palsy unique opportunities for communication, environmental exploration, learning, and game play. Research in adults demonstrates a negative impact of fatigue on BCI enjoyment, while effects on BCI performance are variable. To date, there have been no pediatric studies of BCI fatigue. The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of two different BCI paradigms, motor imagery and visual P300, on the development of self-reported fatigue and an electroencephalography (EEG) biomarker of fatigue in typically developing children. METHODS: Thirty-seven typically-developing school-aged children were recruited to a prospective, crossover study. Participants attended three sessions: (A) motor imagery-BCI, (B) visual P300-BCI, and (C) video viewing (control). The motor imagery task involved an imagined left- or right-hand squeeze. The P300 task involved attending to one square on a 3 × 3 grid during a random single flash sequence. Each paradigm had respective calibration periods and a similar visual counting game. Primary outcomes were self-reported fatigue and the power of the EEG alpha band both collected during resting-state periods pre- and post-task. Self-reported fatigue was measured using a 10-point visual analog scale. EEG alpha band power was calculated as the integrated power spectral density from 8 to 12 Hz of the EEG spectrum. RESULTS: , p = 0.027 respectively). No differences in fatigue development were observed between session types. There was no correlation between self-reported fatigue and EEG alpha band power change. BCI performance varied between participants and paradigms as expected but was not associated with self-reported fatigue or EEG alpha band power. CONCLUSION: Short periods (30-mintues) of BCI use can increase self-reported fatigue and EEG alpha band power to a similar degree in children performing motor imagery and P300 BCI paradigms. Performance was not associated with our measures of fatigue; the impact of fatigue on useability and enjoyment is unclear. Our results reflect the variability of fatigue and the BCI experience more broadly in children and warrant further investigation.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".