Skip to content
EvidenceHelixEvidenceLib · Scientific Encyclopedia
⌘ K

Scientific library

EvidenceLib encyclopediaAll articles A–Z2,835Open textbooks209Open-access articles1,406Cancer study catalog458How it is made

My workspace this browser

Saved pages0Notes & annotations0

Recently viewed

Explore by field

Cancer and Oncology182Genetics and Genomics170Neuroscience185Cardiovascular Medicine180Immunology142Pharmacology173Molecular Biology161Infectious Diseases150Rare and Inherited Diseases181Clinical Research173Anatomy and Physiology613Drugs and Chemicals621Psychiatry and Psychology185Public Health and Nutrition178Diagnostics and Medical Technology125Respiratory Medicine113Digestive System and Liver91Metabolism and Endocrine Disease177Bones, Joints, Muscles and Skin213Kidney, Urology and Women's Health173Eye, Ear, Nose and Throat55
Plans & pricingCompare EvidenceHelix workspace plans
Library›EvidenceLib›Diagnostics and Medical Technology›Brain-Computer Interfaces

Continue where you left off ()

Explore more with EvidenceHelix Workspace

Compare studies, analyze evidence and create research reports with premium tools.

Explore Researcher plans

Research reading room

Brain-Computer Interfaces

Diagnostics and Medical Technology · NLM MeSH · updated 2026-11-04 · version 1

Citations verified against PubMedNot yet clinician-reviewed10 referencesApproximately 5 min read

Instrumentation consisting of hardware and software that communicates with the brain.

Table of Contents

1. Definition2. Research landscape3. Reading the evidence4. Open-access studies5. Key reviews6. References7. About this article

Definition and research guide

This page combines a MeSH definition, publication statistics and selected research abstracts. It is a starting point for reading the literature, not a medical textbook or a systematic evidence review.

Content available: 4 complete abstracts (958 words), 10 references. Full article text is not stored or reproduced here; follow the PMID, DOI or PMC links to read the original sources and their access terms.

Definition

Instrumentation consisting of hardware and software that communicates with the brain. The hardware component of the interface records brain signals, while the software component analyzes the signals and converts them into a command that controls a device or sends a feedback signal to the brain.

Definition: NLM Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) scope note (Public domain (U.S. National Library of Medicine); attribution requested). View the MeSH record.

Also known as: Brain Computer Interfaces; Interface, Brain-Computer; Interfaces, Brain-Computer; Neural Interface Technology; Interface Technologies, Neural; Interface Technology, Neural; Neural Interface Technologies; Technologies, Neural Interface.

Where it fits in the MeSH classification

Broader topics
Electrical Equipment and Supplies
See also
User-Computer Interface

Related concepts

  • Brain

Research landscape

PubMed indexes 6,714 records tagged with the MeSH heading “Brain-Computer Interfaces” (counts retrieved 2026-11-04). 3,895 of them (58.0%) were published from 2020 onward, and the busiest period so far is 2020 onward with 3,895 records.

Reviews account for 672 records (10.0%) and meta-analyses for 35. Randomized controlled trials number 107 (1.6%) as a share of all records on the topic. Randomized trials make up only a small share of this literature, so much of what is known comes from laboratory, observational or descriptive work.

PubMed records by publication periodthrough 1999: 0 records; 2000-2009: 3 records; 2010-2019: 2,866 records; 2020 onward: 3,895 records0through 199932000-20092,8662010-20193,8952020 onward
Records in PubMed indexed with this heading, by publication period. Real counts from NCBI E-utilities; the final period covers only part of the current year. Volume reflects how much has been published, not how strong the evidence is.
Show the data
PeriodRecords
through 19990
2000-20093
2010-20192,866
2020 onward3,895
Share of records by publication typeReviews: 10.0 percent; Meta-analyses: 0.5 percent; Randomized controlled trials: 1.6 percentReviews10.0% (672)Meta-analyses0.5% (35)Randomized controlled trials1.6% (107)
Share of all PubMed records on this heading that carry each publication type. Types overlap with other records, so the shares do not sum to 100%.
Publication-type chart data
Publication types among 6,714 PubMed records
TypeRecordsShare
Reviews67210.0%
Meta-analyses350.5%
Randomized controlled trials1071.6%

Method: PubMed query "Brain-Computer Interfaces"[MeSH Terms] with publication-type and date filters, retrieved 2026-11-04.

Reading the evidence in diagnostics and medical technology

A test or device is judged by how well it detects a condition, how often it gives false alarms or misses cases, and whether using it improves outcomes for people. Accuracy depends on who is tested and how common the condition is, so a test that performs well in a specialist hospital can perform differently in the community. Check the reference standard, the population studied, the sensitivity and specificity and whether results were confirmed in a separate group.

Evidence from open-access studies

These open-access studies come from PubMed’s best-match results for this heading (papers whose main topic it is), ranked here by citation count, with one recent addition. Each abstract is reproduced in full under its recorded open licence so that you can read the authors’ own words. They illustrate the literature; they are not a systematic summary of it. Citation counts measure attention, not reliability or clinical benefit.

Study comparison — selected abstracts, not a systematic review
Study / authorsYearSource label / designEurope PMC citationsLicence / source
Brain Neuroplasticity Leveraging Virtual Reality and Brain-Computer Interface Technologies
Drigas A, Sideraki A
2024Meta-analysis
Design not recorded in structured metadata
56cc by
PMID 39275636 · DOI · PMC11397861
Efficacy of brain-computer interface training with motor imagery-contingent feedback in improving upper limb function and neuroplasticity among persons with chronic stroke: a double-blinded, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial
Kim MS, Park H, Kwon I, An KO, Kim H, Park G, et al.
2025Randomized controlled trial
Design not recorded in structured metadata
45cc by
PMID 39757218 · DOI · PMC11702034
CTNet: a convolutional transformer network for EEG-based motor imagery classification
Zhao W, Jiang X, Zhang B, Xiao S, Weng S
2024Research article
Design not recorded in structured metadata
45cc by
PMID 39215126 · DOI · PMC11364810
Long-term independent use of an intracortical brain-computer interface for speech and cursor control
Card NS, Singer-Clark T, Peracha H, Iacobacci C, Hou X, Wairagkar M, et al.
2026Research article
Design not recorded in structured metadata
9cc by
PMID 42297978 · DOI · PMC13375540

Brain Neuroplasticity Leveraging Virtual Reality and Brain-Computer Interface Technologies [1]

Meta-analysis Drigas A, Sideraki A · · 2024 · cited 56 times (Europe PMC)

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
This study explores neuroplasticity through the use of virtual reality (VR) and brain-computer interfaces (BCIs).
Closing excerpt
The PRISMA method ensured a rigorous and transparent approach to synthesizing evidence, allowing the researchers to draw robust conclusions about the potential of VR and BCI technologies in promoting neuroplasticity and cognitive enhancement.
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (233 words)

This study explores neuroplasticity through the use of virtual reality (VR) and brain-computer interfaces (BCIs). Neuroplasticity is the brain's ability to reorganize itself by forming new neural connections in response to learning, experience, and injury. VR offers a controlled environment to manipulate sensory inputs, while BCIs facilitate real-time monitoring and modulation of neural activity. By combining VR and BCI, researchers can stimulate specific brain regions, trigger neurochemical changes, and influence cognitive functions such as memory, perception, and motor skills. Key findings indicate that VR and BCI interventions are promising for rehabilitation therapies, treatment of phobias and anxiety disorders, and cognitive enhancement. Personalized VR experiences, adapted based on BCI feedback, enhance the efficacy of these interventions. This study underscores the potential for integrating VR and BCI technologies to understand and harness neuroplasticity for cognitive and therapeutic applications. The researchers utilized the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) method to conduct a comprehensive and systematic review of the existing literature on neuroplasticity, VR, and BCI. This involved identifying relevant studies through database searches, screening for eligibility, and assessing the quality of the included studies. Data extraction focused on the effects of VR and BCI on neuroplasticity and cognitive functions. The PRISMA method ensured a rigorous and transparent approach to synthesizing evidence, allowing the researchers to draw robust conclusions about the potential of VR and BCI technologies in promoting neuroplasticity and cognitive enhancement.

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 39275636 · DOI · PMC11397861

Efficacy of brain-computer interface training with motor imagery-contingent feedback in improving upper limb function and neuroplasticity among persons with chronic stroke: a double-blinded, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial [2]

Randomized controlled trial Kim MS, Park H, Kwon I, An KO, Kim H, Park G, et al. · · 2025 · cited 45 times (Europe PMC)

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
BackgroundBrain-computer interface (BCI) technology can enhance neural plasticity and motor recovery in persons with stroke.
Closing excerpt
Trial registrationCRIS (KCT0009013).
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (249 words)

BackgroundBrain-computer interface (BCI) technology can enhance neural plasticity and motor recovery in persons with stroke. However, the effects of BCI training with motor imagery (MI)-contingent feedback versus MI-independent feedback remain unclear. This study aimed to investigate whether the contingent connection between MI-induced brain activity and feedback influences functional and neural plasticity outcomes. We hypothesized that BCI training, with MI-contingent feedback, would result in greater improvements in upper limb function and neural plasticity compared to BCI training, with MI-independent feedback.MethodsThis randomized controlled trial included persons with chronic stroke who underwent BCI training involving functional electrical stimulation feedback on the affected wrist extensor. Primary outcomes included the Medical Research Council (MRC) scale score for muscle strength in the wrist extensor (MRC-WE) and active range of motion in wrist extension (AROM-WE). Resting-state electroencephalogram recordings were used to assess neural plasticity.ResultsCompared to the MI-independent feedback BCI group, the MI-contingent feedback BCI group showed significantly greater improvements in MRC-WE scores (mean difference = 0.52, 95% CI = 0.03-1.00, p = 0.036) and demonstrated increased AROM-WE at 4 weeks post-intervention (p = 0.019). Enhanced functional connectivity in the affected hemisphere was observed in the MI-contingent feedback BCI group, correlating with MRC-WE and Fugl-Meyer assessment-distal scores. Improvements were also observed in the unaffected hemisphere's functional connectivity.ConclusionsBCI training with MI-contingent feedback is more effective than MI-independent feedback in improving AROM-WE, MRC, and neural plasticity in individuals with chronic stroke. BCI technology could be a valuable addition to conventional rehabilitation for stroke survivors, enhancing recovery outcomes.Trial registrationCRIS (KCT0009013).

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 39757218 · DOI · PMC11702034

CTNet: a convolutional transformer network for EEG-based motor imagery classification [3]

Research article Zhao W, Jiang X, Zhang B, Xiao S, Weng S · · 2024 · cited 45 times (Europe PMC)

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
Brain-computer interface (BCI) technology bridges the direct communication between the brain and machines, unlocking new possibilities for human interaction and rehabilitation.
Closing excerpt
This underscores the exceptional efficacy of our approach and its potential to set a new benchmark in EEG decoding.
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (217 words)

Brain-computer interface (BCI) technology bridges the direct communication between the brain and machines, unlocking new possibilities for human interaction and rehabilitation. EEG-based motor imagery (MI) plays a pivotal role in BCI, enabling the translation of thought into actionable commands for interactive and assistive technologies. However, the constrained decoding performance of brain signals poses a limitation to the broader application and development of BCI systems. In this study, we introduce a convolutional Transformer network (CTNet) designed for EEG-based MI classification. Firstly, CTNet employs a convolutional module analogous to EEGNet, dedicated to extracting local and spatial features from EEG time series. Subsequently, it incorporates a Transformer encoder module, leveraging a multi-head attention mechanism to discern the global dependencies of EEG's high-level features. Finally, a straightforward classifier module comprising fully connected layers is followed to categorize EEG signals. In subject-specific evaluations, CTNet achieved remarkable decoding accuracies of 82.52% and 88.49% on the BCI IV-2a and IV-2b datasets, respectively. Furthermore, in the challenging cross-subject assessments, CTNet achieved recognition accuracies of 58.64% on the BCI IV-2a dataset and 76.27% on the BCI IV-2b dataset. In both subject-specific and cross-subject evaluations, CTNet holds a leading position when compared to some of the state-of-the-art methods. This underscores the exceptional efficacy of our approach and its potential to set a new benchmark in EEG decoding.

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 39215126 · DOI · PMC11364810

Long-term independent use of an intracortical brain-computer interface for speech and cursor control [4]

Research article Card NS, Singer-Clark T, Peracha H, Iacobacci C, Hou X, Wairagkar M, et al. · · 2026 · cited 9 times (Europe PMC)

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) can provide naturalistic communication and digital access to people with severe paralysis by decoding neural activity associated with attempted speech and movement.
Closing excerpt
These results demonstrate that intracortical BCIs have the potential to support independent use in the home, marking a critical step toward practical assistive technology for people with severe motor impairment.
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (259 words)

Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) can provide naturalistic communication and digital access to people with severe paralysis by decoding neural activity associated with attempted speech and movement. Recent work has demonstrated highly accurate intracortical BCIs for speech and cursor control, but two critical capabilities needed for practical viability were unmet: independent at-home operation without researcher assistance and reliable long-term performance supporting accurate speech and cursor decoding. Here we demonstrate the independent and near-daily use of a multimodal BCI with novel brain-to-text speech and computer cursor decoders by a man with paralysis and severe dysarthria due to amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Over nearly 2 years, the participant used the BCI for more than 3,800 h at home with no researchers present to maintain rich interpersonal communication with his family and friends, independently control his personal computer and sustain full-time employment-despite being paralyzed. He communicated 183,060 sentences-totaling 1,960,163 words-at an average rate of 56 words per minute. He labeled 92% of sentences as being decoded at least mostly correctly. In formal quantifications of performance where he was asked to say words presented on a screen, attempted speech was consistently decoded with more than 99% word accuracy (125,000 word vocabulary). The participant also used the speech BCI as keyboard input and the cursor BCI as mouse input to control his personal computer, enabling him to send text messages and emails and to browse the internet. These results demonstrate that intracortical BCIs have the potential to support independent use in the home, marking a critical step toward practical assistive technology for people with severe motor impairment.

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 42297978 · DOI · PMC13375540

Key reviews and meta-analyses

The most cited review-type papers among PubMed’s best-match results for this heading, listed with bibliographic details only. Follow the links for the full text and access terms.

  • Research article Deep learning-based electroencephalography analysis: a systematic review [5]
    Roy Y, Banville H, Albuquerque I, Gramfort A, Falk TH, Faubert J · J Neural Eng · 2019 · cited 543 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Brain-computer interfaces for communication and rehabilitation [6]
    Chaudhary U, Birbaumer N, Ramos-Murguialday A · Nat Rev Neurol · 2016 · cited 440 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article A comprehensive review of EEG-based brain-computer interface paradigms [7]
    Abiri R, Borhani S, Sellers EW, Jiang Y, Zhao X · J Neural Eng · 2019 · cited 414 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Brain-Machine Interfaces: From Basic Science to Neuroprostheses and Neurorehabilitation [8]
    Lebedev MA, Nicolelis MA · Physiol Rev · 2017 · cited 308 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Brain-machine interfaces from motor to mood [9]
    Shanechi MM · Nat Neurosci · 2019 · cited 169 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Riemannian Approaches in Brain-Computer Interfaces: A Review [10]
    Yger F, Berar M, Lotte F · IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng · 2017 · cited 152 times (Europe PMC)

References

  1. Drigas A, Sideraki A. Brain Neuroplasticity Leveraging Virtual Reality and Brain-Computer Interface Technologies. . 2024. PMID 39275636 · DOI · PMC11397861
  2. Kim MS, Park H, Kwon I, An KO, Kim H, Park G, et al.. Efficacy of brain-computer interface training with motor imagery-contingent feedback in improving upper limb function and neuroplasticity among persons with chronic stroke: a double-blinded, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial. . 2025. PMID 39757218 · DOI · PMC11702034
  3. Zhao W, Jiang X, Zhang B, Xiao S, Weng S. CTNet: a convolutional transformer network for EEG-based motor imagery classification. . 2024. PMID 39215126 · DOI · PMC11364810
  4. Card NS, Singer-Clark T, Peracha H, Iacobacci C, Hou X, Wairagkar M, et al.. Long-term independent use of an intracortical brain-computer interface for speech and cursor control. . 2026. PMID 42297978 · DOI · PMC13375540
  5. Roy Y, Banville H, Albuquerque I, Gramfort A, Falk TH, Faubert J. Deep learning-based electroencephalography analysis: a systematic review. J Neural Eng. 2019. PMID 31151119 · DOI
  6. Chaudhary U, Birbaumer N, Ramos-Murguialday A. Brain-computer interfaces for communication and rehabilitation. Nat Rev Neurol. 2016. PMID 27539560 · DOI
  7. Abiri R, Borhani S, Sellers EW, Jiang Y, Zhao X. A comprehensive review of EEG-based brain-computer interface paradigms. J Neural Eng. 2019. PMID 30523919 · DOI
  8. Lebedev MA, Nicolelis MA. Brain-Machine Interfaces: From Basic Science to Neuroprostheses and Neurorehabilitation. Physiol Rev. 2017. PMID 28275048 · DOI
  9. Shanechi MM. Brain-machine interfaces from motor to mood. Nat Neurosci. 2019. PMID 31551595 · DOI
  10. Yger F, Berar M, Lotte F. Riemannian Approaches in Brain-Computer Interfaces: A Review. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2017. PMID 27845666 · DOI

About this article

Sources
NLM Medical Subject Headings (definition, synonyms); NCBI PubMed (counts, identifiers); Europe PMC (open-access abstracts and citation counts).
Verification
Every reference was resolved against PubMed on 2026-11-04; title, year and DOI matched.
Review state
automated source verified; no human expert review has been recorded yet.
Version
1, last updated 2026-11-04.

See how EvidenceLib is built. Spotted an error? Email support@evidencehelix.com.

Evidence strength

EvidenceHelix's computed view of the study designs behind this topic: how common meta-analyses, randomized trials and reviews are, how recent the literature is, and a plain-language reading. It describes the design mix of the literature. It is not a quality appraisal of any study, and it is not medical advice.

Included with the Researcher plan

Reading every article stays free. This computed view is part of the paid plans.

See plans Sign in

Your notes

Notes and highlights stay in this browser only; they are not sent to EvidenceHelix.

Related research topics

  • NeuroimagingDiagnostics and Medical Technology
  • Brain MappingDiagnostics and Medical Technology
  • Functional NeuroimagingDiagnostics and Medical Technology
  • ConnectomeDiagnostics and Medical Technology
  • Semen AnalysisDiagnostics and Medical Technology
  • Neural TubeAnatomy and Physiology

All 110 articles in Diagnostics and Medical Technology →

At a glance

6,714
PubMed records on this heading
58%
published since 2020
672
review articles
107
randomized trials
10
verified references below

Counts come from PubMed on 2026-11-04; they show how much has been written, not how strong the evidence is.

Related topics See all →

  • NeuroimagingDiagnostics and Medical Technology
  • Brain MappingDiagnostics and Medical Technology
  • Functional NeuroimagingDiagnostics and Medical Technology
  • ConnectomeDiagnostics and Medical Technology
  • Semen AnalysisDiagnostics and Medical Technology

My notes & annotations (0)

Nothing yet. Select text and press Highlight, or write a note in the Notes tab. Stored in this browser only.

Sources

  • NLM MeSH record ↗
  • PubMed search used ↗

EvidenceLib is a research-education resource, not medical advice. It does not diagnose, prescribe or recommend starting, stopping or changing any treatment. Talk to a qualified clinician about your own situation. Methods, sources and licences · Rights and removal requests · Legal · Support