Evidence Hub

Large language models integrated into brain-computer interfaces for communication and control: a systematic review

Gorenshtein A, Omar M, Barash Y, Nadkarni GN, Klang E

Biomedical physics & engineering express, 2026

3 citations

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) are starting to be coupled with brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) for assistive communication, but the resulting systems differ widely in where the model sits in the pipeline and in what they actually measure. We performed a systematic review, prepared according to PRISMA, of eleven studies that combine an LLM with a BCI for communication or control. The included work covers P300, SSVEP, cVEP, passive affective and auditory paradigms, and five integration patterns: autocomplete, post-edit correction, intent expansion, dynamic interface generation and affective support. For each study we extracted the hardware and decoding pipeline, the LLM and prompting strategy, latency reporting and outcomes; we used scenario-appropriate metrics rather than a single common metric. Risk of bias was judged with an adapted ROBINS-I framework that stratified studies into online, offline-simulation and system-proposal categories. In the copy-spelling scenario, two studies that measured keystroke savings directly reported values above 50%, with one study exceeding 60% in a multi-turn condition; on an intent-based ALS message-bank task, one online study reached 42 characters per minute with a semantic accuracy of 88%. None of the eleven studies enrolled motor-impaired patients, seven of eleven relied on remote OpenAI endpoints, and reporting of end-to-end latency and failure modes was sparse. We propose a five-category taxonomy of BCI/LLM integration, separate findings…

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.

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