Brain-computer interface clinical trial design considerations and clinical outcome assessments in pivotal studies: a summary of the 11th BCI society meeting 2025 workshop

OBJECTIVE: The Brain Computer Interface (BCI) Society Meeting 2025 held a workshop in collaboration with the Implantable BCI Collaborative Community (iBCI-CC) to discuss the selection, development and validation of clinical trial outcome assessments (COAs) for pivotal studies of BCIs. The iBCI-CC Clinical Study Endpoints Workgroup aims to build consensus on a COA framework that can meet the demands of emerging iBCI trials. Approach: The workshop brought together diverse stakeholders from the iBCI-CC community and beyond, including industry, academic and government institutions to engage in pre-competitive collaborative discussion. Main results: Through presentations, panel discussions and breakout groups, workshop participants highlighted meaningful aspects of health (MAHs) relevant to iBCI users, clarified the need to define corresponding concepts of interest (COIs) and to identify or adapt clinical outcome assessments (COAs) capable of capturing both functional impact and real-world use. Key challenges highlighted during the workshop are patient heterogeneity, the lack of widely validated and fit-for-purpose COAs, and the need to capture meaningful outcomes in home and daily-life environments. Lessons drawn from trials such as ADAPT-PD underscore the value of capturing device performance in home and daily-life settings, highlighting the need for context-sensitive and flexible metrics that reflect patient priorities. Significance: This workshop lays a foundation for the iBCI-CC Clinical Study Endpoints Workgroup to establish a transparent process for identifying MAHs and COIs that are suitable for specific iBCI technologies, patient-informed, and conducive to regulatory approval and reimbursement. By combining rigorous, quantitative assessment with patient-informed goals, iBCI clinical trials can advance toward safe, effective, and accessible neurotechnologies that enhance how a person with a severe motor impairment feels, functions and survives. .

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Neural Engineering
Published
2026-08-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-2552/ae9eee
Primary Topic
EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Brain-computer interface clinical trial design considerations and clinical outcome assessments in pivotal studies: a summary of the 11th BCI society meeting 2025 workshop

Luke Bashford, Dustin Herrmann, Rohit Bose, Abbey Sawyer et al.
Journal of Neural Engineering
EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
article

Brain-computer interface clinical trial design considerations and clinical outcome assessments in pivotal studies: a summary of the 11th BCI society meeting 2025 workshop

Luke Bashford, Dustin Herrmann, Rohit Bose, Abbey Sawyer, Juhi Farooqui, Leigh R. Hochberg, Matthew R. Angle, Jennifer French, Jessica N. Kelemen, David McMullen, Cristin G. Welle, Daniel R. Kramer, Thomas J. Oxley, Nikole Chetty, Jacqueline Dister, Erin Michele Radcliffe, Jakub Kowalczyk, Robert Franklin
article en

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The Brain Computer Interface (BCI) Society Meeting 2025 held a workshop in collaboration with the Implantable BCI Collaborative Community (iBCI-CC) to discuss the selection, development and validation of clinical trial outcome assessments (COAs) for pivotal studies of BCIs. The iBCI-CC Clinical Study Endpoints Workgroup aims to build consensus on a COA framework that can meet the demands of emerging iBCI trials. Approach: The workshop brought together diverse stakeholders from the iBCI-CC community and beyond, including industry, academic and government institutions to engage in pre-competitive collaborative discussion. Main results: Through presentations, panel discussions and breakout groups, workshop participants highlighted meaningful aspects of health (MAHs) relevant to iBCI users, clarified the need to define corresponding concepts of interest (COIs) and to identify or adapt clinical outcome assessments (COAs) capable of capturing both functional impact and real-world use. Key challenges highlighted during the workshop are patient heterogeneity, the lack of widely validated and fit-for-purpose COAs, and the need to capture meaningful outcomes in home and daily-life environments. Lessons drawn from trials such as ADAPT-PD underscore the value of capturing device performance in home and daily-life settings, highlighting the need for context-sensitive and flexible metrics that reflect patient priorities. Significance: This workshop lays a foundation for the iBCI-CC Clinical Study Endpoints Workgroup to establish a transparent process for identifying MAHs and COIs that are suitable for specific iBCI technologies, patient-informed, and conducive to regulatory approval and reimbursement. By combining rigorous, quantitative assessment with patient-informed goals, iBCI clinical trials can advance toward safe, effective, and accessible neurotechnologies that enhance how a person with a severe motor impairment feels, functions and survives. .

Journal of Neural Engineering
Harvard University (US), University of Colorado System (US), Massachusetts General Hospital (US), Neurotech (United States) (US), Blackrock Microsystems (United States) (US), Link Foundation (US), Centro Universitário Católico do Sudoeste do Paraná (BR), Synchronoss (United States) (US), Fluid Synchrony (United States) (US), University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus (US), Case Western Reserve University (US), Carnegie Mellon University (US), University of Pennsylvania (US), Newcastle University (GB), University of Colorado Denver (US), Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
National Institutes of Health, U.S. Food and Drug Administration
Industry, innovation and infrastructure, Partnerships for the goals
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.