Peer-reviewed article
Wireless Electroencephalography in Research on Children With Developmental Disabilities: Scoping Review.
Park N, Shin Y, Kang J, Lee YE, Lee A ·
Summary
Written by AI, not yet AICS's view · claude-haiku-4-5-20251001This scoping review examines how wireless electroencephalography (EEG) devices have been used in research with children who have developmental disabilities. The review identified 64 studies across attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and autism spectrum disorder research, with applications ranging from diagnosis to brain-computer interfaces. The review found that data quality reporting practices are often incomplete, with most studies not validating their wireless systems against standard wired EEG or reporting technical specifications.
Key points
- 64 studies enrolling 3,103 participants used wireless EEG in children with developmental disabilities between 2005 and 2025
- ADHD (59.4%) and autism spectrum disorder (31.3%) were the most frequently studied conditions
- Primary applications were biomarker-driven assessment (51.6%), brain-computer interfaces (28.1%), intervention evaluation (12.5%), and task monitoring (7.8%)
- Consumer-grade devices predominated (47.7%), followed by research-only (29.2%) and medical devices (23.1%)
- 85.9% of studies did not report validation against wired EEG, 79.7% did not specify impedance thresholds, and 12.5% described no artifact handling
Limitations
This is a scoping review that maps evidence rather than evaluating intervention effectiveness. It describes gaps in reporting standards but does not assess whether wireless EEG produces clinically valid or reliable results in children with developmental disabilities, nor does it evaluate the effectiveness of any specific intervention for improving child well-being.
Abstract
Background Wireless electroencephalography (EEG) systems offer practical advantages over conventional wired devices in the assessment of children with developmental disabilities (DDs), including enhanced portability, reduced participant burden, and ease of use. However, how these systems have been applied across diverse DD populations, research purposes, and clinical contexts remains unclear. Objective This scoping review aimed to map available evidence on wireless EEG applications in children with DDs, characterize device specifications by application purpose, identify neurobehavioral challenges and corresponding methodological solutions, and assess data quality-related reporting practices. Methods This scoping review followed the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews), PRISMA-S (PRISMA Statement for Reporting Literature Searches in Systematic Reviews), and the population, concept, and context framework: population, children aged<19 years with DDs; concept, studies using wireless EEG devices for data collection; and context, all research and clinical settings. A systematic search was conducted across 7 databases (PubMed, Embase, IEEE Xplore, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Scopus) from their inception through December 2025. Screening was performed independently by 4 reviewers. Data on study characteristics, device specifications, neurobehavioral recording challenges, and data quality reporting were extracted and synthesized descriptively, including cross-tabulation of devices by application purpose. Results Of 594 identified records, 64 studies enrolling 3103 participants met the inclusion criteria. Studies were published between 2005 and 2025, with an increasing trend in both publications and sample sizes. Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (38/64, 59.4%) and autism spectrum disorder (20/64, 31.3%) were the most frequently studied conditions. Primary application domains were biomarker-driven assessment and diagnosis (33/64, 51.6%), brain-computer interface (BCI) technology (18/64, 28.1%), intervention evaluation (8/64, 12.5%), and task or state monitoring (5/64, 7.8%). Across 65 study-device pairs, consumer-grade devices predominated (31/65, 47.7%), followed by research-use-only (19/65, 29.2%) and medical devices (15/65, 23.1%). Purpose-driven patterns emerged: BCI studies favored low-channel, dry-electrode, consumer-grade devices, whereas biomarker-driven and intervention studies used higher channel counts and greater signal fidelity. Recurring neurobehavioral challenges (eg, inattention, sensory hypersensitivity, and motor impairment) were addressed through rapid, low-preparation electrode setups, child-friendly device designs, and adapted recording protocols such as home-based or caregiver-mediated sessions. Data quality-related reporting was substantially incomplete: 85.9% (55/64) did not report validation against a wired EEG system, 79.7% (51/64) did not specify impedance thresholds, and 12.5% (8/64) described no artifact handling. Conclusions This scoping review is the first to comprehensively map wireless EEG research in children across a broad spectrum of DDs-integrating diagnosis, study context, and device characteristics-rather than focusing on a single condition or purpose. This review highlights critical gaps in data quality-related reporting that limit the interpretability and comparability of current findings. Future studies should prioritize rigorous validation within DD cohorts and the development of population-specific guidelines for device selection, signal quality assurance, and reporting transparency.