Evidence Hub

Artificial intelligence for brain-to-speech decoding in paralysis: a systematic review

Belfrouh S, Salmam FZ, Errattahi R, Hanine M, Obidallah WJ, Alhulayyil H

BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2026

82 participants

Abstract

The loss of communication constitutes a critical challenge for people living with paralysis. Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) paired with artificial intelligence (AI) provide an opportunity to restore this ability. This systematic review examined the use of AI to decode speech from brain signals through both invasive and non-invasive neural interfaces. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we reviewed 115 studies published between 2019 and 2025 to extract data on acquisition protocols, signal preprocessing, and AI architectures. The quality of each study was evaluated using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2). The results indicated that the invasive approach achieved a higher median multiclass classification accuracy than the non-invasive method (77.7%, interquartile range (IQR): 61.4-93.2% vs. 73.0%, IQR: 49.3-89.2%; N = 82 studies with comparable multiclass metrics), computed from the best-performing model per study across heterogeneous task types, vocabulary sizes, and predominantly subject-dependent evaluation paradigms (84.3% of studies). However, this narrow gap in raw accuracy (4.7% points) should not be interpreted as a direct cross-modality performance ranking, as it obscures substantial differences in task complexity (invasive studies typically decoded larger vocabularies and continuous speech), evaluation paradigm, and participant population. Additionally, the hybrid…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 82 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free