Promotion of Communication Access, Choice, and Agency for Autistic Students.

PURPOSE: Families and professionals often consider augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) a "last resort" for persons with communication challenges; however, speaking autistic adults have reported that they would have benefited from access to AAC as children. This tutorial discusses the history of this "last resort" practice and its perpetuation within the medical model of disability. The tutorial focuses on communication access, choice, and agency for autistic students. METHOD: We provide a brief overview of the AAC community and their preferred terminology, review the history of traditional approaches to research on AAC and autism, and then examine the relationship between disability models and ableism to views of spoken language as a priority of intervention. Studies on this topic are rare, and resisting ableism requires acknowledging and honoring disabled people's experiences and expertise. Therefore, we promote autistic expertise within the framework of evidence-based practice and discuss the experiences of autistic people and spoken language. Finally, we consider the role of the speech-language pathologist (SLP) in assessment and offer autistic-based strategies and recommendations for communication support. CONCLUSIONS: Speaking autistic students who could benefit from AAC may not have access to AAC due to the prioritization of spoken language and lack of awareness of the benefit of AAC. We recommend that SLPs and school-based professionals support and facilitate access, communicative choice, and agency by implementing multimodal communication strategies to include AAC use for autistic students regardless of their spoken language status. Promoting all types of communication and ensuring opportunities for communication across multiple modalities are paramount to a child's agency and self-determination, as is normalization of AAC.

A systematic review of research on augmentative and alternative communication brain-computer interface systems for individuals with disabilities.

Augmentative and alternative communication brain-computer interface (AAC-BCI) systems are intended to offer communication access to people with severe speech and physical impairment (SSPI) without requiring volitional movement. As the field moves toward clinical implementation of AAC-BCI systems, research involving participants with SSPI is essential. Research has demonstrated variability in AAC-BCI system performance across users, and mixed results for comparisons of performance for users with and without disabilities. The aims of this systematic review were to (1) describe study, system, and participant characteristics reported in BCI research, (2) summarize the communication task performance of participants with disabilities using AAC-BCI systems, and (3) explore any differences in performance for participants with and without disabilities. Electronic databases were searched in May, 2018, and March, 2021, identifying 6065 records, of which 73 met inclusion criteria. Non-experimental study designs were common and sample sizes were typically small, with approximately half of studies involving five or fewer participants with disabilities. There was considerable variability in participant characteristics, and in how those characteristics were reported. Over 60% of studies reported an average selection accuracy ≤70% for participants with disabilities in at least one tested condition. However, some studies excluded participants who did not reach a specific system performance criterion, and others did not state whether any participants were excluded based on performance. Twenty-nine studies included participants both with and without disabilities, but few reported statistical analyses comparing performance between the two groups. Results suggest that AAC-BCI systems show promise for supporting communication for people with SSPI, but they remain ineffective for some individuals. The lack of standards in reporting outcome measures makes it difficult to synthesize data across studies. Further research is needed to demonstrate efficacy of AAC-BCI systems for people who experience SSPI of varying etiologies and severity levels, and these individuals should be included in system design and testing. Consensus in terminology and consistent participant, protocol, and performance description will facilitate the exploration of user and system characteristics that positively or negatively affect AAC-BCI use, and support innovations that will make this technology more useful to a broader group of people. Clinical trial registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42018095345, PROSPERO: CRD42018095345.

SSVEP BCI and Eye Tracking Use by Individuals With Late-Stage ALS and Visual Impairments.

Access to communication is critical for individuals with late-stage amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and minimal volitional movement, but they sometimes present with concomitant visual or ocular motility impairments that affect their performance with eye tracking or visual brain-computer interface (BCI) systems. In this study, we explored the use of modified eye tracking and steady state visual evoked potential (SSVEP) BCI, in combination with the Shuffle Speller typing interface, for this population. Two participants with late-stage ALS, visual impairments, and minimal volitional movement completed a single-case experimental research design comparing copy-spelling performance with three different typing systems: (1) commercially available eye tracking communication software, (2) Shuffle Speller with modified eye tracking, and (3) Shuffle Speller with SSVEP BCI. Participant 1 was unable to type any correct characters with the commercial system, but achieved accuracies of up to 50% with Shuffle Speller eye tracking and 89% with Shuffle Speller BCI. Participant 2 also had higher maximum accuracies with Shuffle Speller, typing with up to 63% accuracy with eye tracking and 100% accuracy with BCI. However, participants' typing accuracy for both Shuffle Speller conditions was highly variable, particularly in the BCI condition. Both the Shuffle Speller interface and SSVEP BCI input show promise for improving typing performance for people with late-stage ALS. Further development of innovative BCI systems for this population is needed.

Human visual skills for brain-computer interface use: a tutorial.

Background and objectives: Many brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) for people with severe disabilities present stimuli in the visual modality with little consideration of the visual skills required for successful use. The primary objective of this tutorial is to present researchers and clinical professionals with basic information about the visual skills needed for functional use of visual BCIs, and to offer modifications that would render BCI technology more accessible for persons with vision impairments.Methods: First, we provide a background on BCIs that rely on a visual interface. We then describe the visual skills required for BCI technologies that are used for augmentative and alternative communication (AAC), as well as common eye conditions or impairments that can impact the user's performance. We summarize screening tools that can be administered by the non-eye care professional in a research or clinical setting, as well as the role of the eye care professional. Finally, we explore potential BCI design modifications to compensate for identified functional impairments. Information was generated from literature review and the clinical experience of vision experts.Results and conclusions: This in-depth description culminates in foundational information about visual skills and functional visual impairments that affect the design and use of visual interfaces for BCI technologies. The visual interface is a critical component of successful BCI systems. We can determine a BCI system for potential users with visual impairments and design BCI visual interfaces based on sound anatomical and physiological visual clinical science.Implications for RehabilitationAs brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) become possible access methods for people with severe motor impairments, it is critical that clinicians have a basic knowledge of the visual skills necessary for use of visual BCI interfaces.Rehabilitation providers must have a knowledge of objectively gathering information regarding a potential BCI user's functional visual skills.Rehabilitation providers must understand how to modify BCI visual interfaces for the potential user with visual impairments.Rehabilitation scientists should understand the visual demands of BCIs as they develop and evaluate these new access methods.

Trends in research participant categories and descriptions in abstracts from the International BCI Meeting series, 1999 to 2016.

Much brain-computer interface (BCI) research is intended to benefit people with disabilities (PWD), but inclusion of these individuals as study participants remains relatively rare. When participants with disabilities are included, they are described with a range of clinical and non-clinical terms with varying degrees of specificity, often leading to difficulty in interpreting or replicating results. This study examined trends in inclusion and description of study participants with disabilities across six International BCI Meetings from 1999 to 2016. Abstracts from each Meeting were analyzed by two trained independent reviewers. Results suggested a decline in participation by PWD across Meetings until the 2016 Meeting. Increased diagnostic specificity was noted at the 2013 and 2016 Meetings. Fifty-eight percent of the abstracts identified PWD as being the target beneficiaries of BCI research, though only twenty-two percent included participants with disabilities, suggesting evidence of a persistent translational gap. Participants with disabilities were most commonly described as having physical and/or communication impairments compared to impairments in other areas. Implementing participatory action research principles and user-centered design strategies continues to be necessary within BCI research to bridge the translational gap and facilitate use of BCI systems within functional environments for PWD.

Effects of simulated visual acuity and ocular motility impairments on SSVEP brain-computer interface performance: An experiment with Shuffle Speller.

Individuals with severe speech and physical impairments may have concomitant visual acuity impairments (VAI) or ocular motility impairments (OMI) impacting visual BCI use. We report on the use of the Shuffle Speller typing interface for an SSVEP BCI copy-spelling task under three conditions: simulated VAI, simulated OMI, and unimpaired vision. To mitigate the effect of visual impairments, we introduce a method that adaptively selects a user-specific trial length to maximize expected information transfer rate (ITR); expected ITR is shown to closely approximate the rate of correct letter selections. All participants could type under the unimpaired and simulated VAI conditions, with no significant differences in typing accuracy or speed. Most participants (31 of 37) could not type under the simulated OMI condition; some achieved high accuracy but with slower typing speeds. Reported workload and discomfort were low, and satisfaction high, under the unimpaired and simulated VAI conditions. Implications and future directions to examine effect of visual impairment on BCI use is discussed.

Vigilance state fluctuations and performance using brain-computer interface for communication.

The effect of fatigue and drowsiness on brain-computer interface (BCI) performance was evaluated. 20 healthy participants performed a standardized 11-minute calibration of a Rapid Serial Visual Presentation BCI system five times over two hours. For each calibration, BCI performance was evaluated using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Self-rated measures were obtained following each calibration including the Karolinska Sleepiness Scale and a standardized boredom scale. Physiological measures were obtained during each calibration including P300 amplitude, theta power, alpha power, median power frequency and eye-blink rate. There was a significant decrease in AUC over the five sessions. This was paralleled by increases in self-rated sleepiness and boredom and decreases in P300 amplitude. Alpha power, median power frequency, and eye-blink rate also increased but more modestly. AUC changes were only partly explained by changes in P300 amplitude. There was a decrease in BCI performance over time that related to increases in sleepiness and boredom. This worsened performance was only partly explained by decreases in P300 amplitude. Thus, drowsiness and boredom have a negative impact on BCI performance. Increased BCI performance may be possible by developing physiological measures to provide feedback to the user or to adapt the classifier to state.