Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34733229›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neurology2021

Wearable Reduced-Channel EEG System for Remote Seizure Monitoring.

Mitchell A Frankel, Mark J Lehmkuhle, Mark C Spitz, Blake J Newman, Sindhu V Richards, Amir M Arain

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Seizure Detection Devices.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Mitchell A FrankelEpitel, Inc., Salt Lake City, UT, United States.
Mark J LehmkuhleEpitel, Inc., Salt Lake City, UT, United States.
Mark C SpitzNeurology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Center, Aurora, CO, United States.
Blake J NewmanDepartment of Neurology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, United States.
Sindhu V RichardsDepartment of Neurology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, United States.
Amir M ArainDepartment of Neurology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, United States.
University of Utah · USEpitel (United States) · USUniversity of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus · US

Funding

REMI Platform for Remote EEG MonitoringSB1NS100235 · NINDS · EPITEL, INC. · PI LEHMKUHLE, MARK J. · 2022 to 2024
$3.4M
EEG PatchR44NS100235 · NINDS · EPITEL, INC. · PI LEHMKUHLE, MARK J. · 2017 to 2019
$2.1M
EEG PatchR43NS100235 · NINDS · EPITEL, INC. · PI LEHMKUHLE, MARK J. · 2016 to 2016
$231k
NINDS NIH HHS R43 NS100235NINDS NIH HHS R44 NS100235NINDS NIH HHS SB1 NS100235
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Epitel has developed Epilog, a miniature, wireless, wearable electroencephalography (EEG) sensor. Four Epilog sensors are combined as part of Epitel's Remote EEG Monitoring platform (REMI) to create 10 channels of EEG for remote patient monitoring. REMI is designed to provide comprehensive spatial EEG recordings that can be administered by non-specialized medical personnel in any medical center. The purpose of this study was to determine how accurate epileptologists are at remotely reviewing Epilog sensor EEG in the 10-channel "REMI montage," with and without seizure detection support software. Three board certified epileptologists reviewed the REMI montage from 20 subjects who wore four Epilog sensors for up to 5 days alongside traditional video-EEG in the EMU, 10 of whom experienced a total of 24 focal-onset electrographic seizures and 10 of whom experienced no seizures or epileptiform activity. Epileptologists randomly reviewed the same datasets with and without clinical decision support annotations from an automated seizure detection algorithm tuned to be highly sensitive. Blinded consensus review of unannotated Epilog EEG in the REMI montage detected people who were experiencing electrographic seizure activity with 90% sensitivity and 90% specificity. Consensus detection of individual focal onset seizures resulted in a mean sensitivity of 61%, precision of 80%, and false detection rate (FDR) of 0.002 false positives per hour (FP/h) of data. With algorithm seizure detection annotations, the consensus review mean sensitivity improved to 68% with a slight increase in FDR (0.005 FP/h). As seizure detection software, the automated algorithm detected people who were experiencing electrographic seizure activity with 100% sensitivity and 70% specificity, and detected individual focal onset seizures with a mean sensitivity of 90% and mean false alarm rate of 0.087 FP/h. This is the first study showing epileptologists' ability to blindly review EEG from four Epilog sensors in the REMI montage, and the results demonstrate the clinical potential to accurately identify patients experiencing electrographic seizures. Additionally, the automated algorithm shows promise as clinical decision support software to detect discrete electrographic seizures in individual records as accurately as FDA-cleared predicates.

Indexed as

EEGmachine learningremote monitoringseizure detectionwearables

Identifiers

PMID34733229
PMCPMC8558398
OpenAlexW3205790912

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.