ArticleBrain sciences2021
Online Prediction of Lead Seizures from iEEG Data.
Article in Brain sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
- Individualized Seizure Cluster Prediction Using Machine Learning and Chronic Ambulatory Intracranial EEG.IEEE transactions on nanobioscience · 2023Article
- Removing artefacts and periodically retraining improve performance of neural network-based seizure prediction models.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Epileptic prediction using spatiotemporal information combined with optimal features strategy on EEG.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
- The performance evaluation of the state-of-the-art EEG-based seizure prediction models.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Review
- Novel subscalp and intracranial devices to wirelessly record and analyze continuous EEG in unsedated, behaving dogs in their natural environments: A new paradigm in canine epilepsy research.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2022Review
- Dogs as a Natural Animal Model of Epilepsy.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2022Review
- Performance metrics for online seizure prediction.Neural networks : the official journal of the International Neural Network Society · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We describe a novel system for online prediction of lead seizures from long-term intracranial electroencephalogram (iEEG) recordings for canines with naturally occurring epilepsy. This study adopts new specification of lead seizures, reflecting strong clustering of seizures in observed data. This clustering results in fewer lead seizures (~7 lead seizures per dog), and hence new challenges for online seizure prediction, that are addressed in the proposed system. In particular, the machine learning part of the system is implemented using the group learning method suitable for modeling sparse and noisy seizure data. In addition, several modifications for the proposed system are introduced to cope with the non-stationarity of a noisy iEEG signal. They include: (1) periodic retraining of the SVM classifier using most recent training data; (2) removing samples with noisy labels from training data; and (3) introducing a new adaptive post-processing technique for combining many predictions made for 20 s windows into a single prediction for a 4 h segment. Application of the proposed system requires only two lead seizures for training the initial model, and results in high prediction performance for all four dogs (with mean 0.84 sensitivity, 0.27 time-in-warning, and 0.78 false-positive rate per day). The proposed system achieves accurate prediction of lead seizures during long-term test periods, 3-16 lead seizures during a 169-364 day test period, whereas earlier studies did not differentiate between lead vs. non-lead seizures and used much shorter test periods (~few days long).
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.