ArticleScientific reports2021
Prospective evaluation of interrater agreement between EEG technologists and neurophysiologists.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Unveiling variability: A systematic review of reproducibility in visual EEG analysis, with focus on seizures.Epileptic disorders : international epilepsy journal with videotape · 2024Pooled it
- Reliability of EEG in brain death diagnosis: an analysis of clinical and technical factors.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Assessing the performance of artificial intelligence in detecting electrographic status epilepticus when human experts often disagree.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Article
- Competence of healthcare professionals performing electroencephalography test: A systematic review.Clinical neurophysiology practice · 2025Review
- Machine learning algorithm for predicting seizure control after temporal lobe resection using peri-ictal electroencephalography.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Deep learning for EEG-based prognostication after cardiac arrest: from current research to future clinical applications.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Review
- Repetitive Electroencephalography as Biomarker for the Prediction of Survival in Patients with Post-Hypoxic Encephalopathy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We aim to prospectively investigate, in a large and heterogeneous population, the electroencephalogram (EEG)-reading performances of EEG technologists. A total of 8 EEG technologists and 5 certified neurophysiologists independently analyzed 20-min EEG recordings. Interrater agreement (IRA) for predefined EEG pattern identification between EEG technologists and neurophysiologits was assessed using percentage of agreement (PA) and Gwet-AC1. Among 1528 EEG recordings, the PA [95% confidence interval] and interrater agreement (IRA, AC1) values were as follows: status epilepticus (SE) and seizures, 97% [96-98%], AC1 kappa = 0.97; interictal epileptiform discharges, 78% [76-80%], AC1 = 0.63; and conclusion dichotomized as "normal" versus "pathological", 83.6% [82-86%], AC1 = 0.71. EEG technologists identified SE and seizures with 99% [98-99%] negative predictive value, whereas the positive predictive values (PPVs) were 48% [34-62%] and 35% [20-53%], respectively. The PPV for normal EEGs was 72% [68-76%]. SE and seizure detection were impaired in poorly cooperating patients (SE and seizures; p < 0.001), intubated and older patients (SE; p < 0.001), and confirmed epilepsy patients (seizures; p = 0.004). EEG technologists identified ictal features with few false negatives but high false positives, and identified normal EEGs with good PPV. The absence of ictal features reported by EEG technologists can be reassuring; however, EEG traces should be reviewed by neurophysiologists before taking action.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.