Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34183718›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Prospective evaluation of interrater agreement between EEG technologists and neurophysiologists.

Isabelle Beuchat, Senubia Alloussi, Philipp S Reif, Nora Sterlepper, Felix Rosenow, Adam Strzelczyk

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Unveiling variability: A systematic review of reproducibility in visual EEG analysis, with focus on seizures.Epileptic disorders : international epilepsy journal with videotape · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Isabelle BeuchatEpilepsy Center Frankfurt Rhine-Main and Department of Neurology, Center of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Goethe-University Frankfurt, Schleusenweg 2-16 (Haus 95), 60528, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-9300-4443
Senubia AlloussiEpilepsy Center Frankfurt Rhine-Main and Department of Neurology, Center of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Goethe-University Frankfurt, Schleusenweg 2-16 (Haus 95), 60528, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Philipp S ReifEpilepsy Center Frankfurt Rhine-Main and Department of Neurology, Center of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Goethe-University Frankfurt, Schleusenweg 2-16 (Haus 95), 60528, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Nora SterlepperEpilepsy Center Frankfurt Rhine-Main and Department of Neurology, Center of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Goethe-University Frankfurt, Schleusenweg 2-16 (Haus 95), 60528, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Felix RosenowEpilepsy Center Frankfurt Rhine-Main and Department of Neurology, Center of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Goethe-University Frankfurt, Schleusenweg 2-16 (Haus 95), 60528, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Adam StrzelczykEpilepsy Center Frankfurt Rhine-Main and Department of Neurology, Center of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Goethe-University Frankfurt, Schleusenweg 2-16 (Haus 95), 60528, Frankfurt am Main, Germany. strzelczyk@med.uni-frankfurt.de.ORCID 0000-0001-6288-9915
Goethe University Frankfurt · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

ElectroencephalographyMedical Laboratory PersonnelNeurophysiologyObserver VariationAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overConsciousnessEpilepsyFemaleHumansMaleMedical OveruseMiddle AgedProspective Studies

Identifiers

PMID34183718
PMCPMC8238944
OpenAlexW3173281878

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.