Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36149301›Full record

ArticleEpilepsia2022

Seizure count forecasting to aid diagnostic testing in epilepsy.

Emily T Wang, Sharon Chiang, Stephen Cleboski, Vikram R Rao, Marina Vannucci, Zulfi Haneef

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Epilepsia, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 40% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. State Space Modeling of Event Count Time Series.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    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 4 institutions in 1 country.

Emily T WangDepartment of Statistics, Rice University, Houston, Texas, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9178-9227
Sharon ChiangDepartment of Neurology and Weill Institute for Neurosciences, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4548-4550
Stephen CleboskiNeuroPace, Mountain View, California, USA.
Vikram R RaoDepartment of Statistics, Rice University, Houston, Texas, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6389-2638
Marina VannucciDepartment of Statistics, Rice University, Houston, Texas, USA.
Zulfi HaneefDepartment of Neurology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0720-1417
Rice University · USMichael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center · USNeuroPace (United States) · USUniversity of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

TRAINING PROGRAM IN COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY AND MEDICINET15LM007093 · NLM · RICE UNIVERSITY · PI Lydia E. Kavraki · 1992 to 2026
$20.8M
NINDS Research Education Programs for Residents and Fellows in Neurology, Neurosurgery, Neuropathology, Neuroradiology and Emergency Medicine (R25)R25NS070680 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI JOSEPHSON, SCOTT ANDREW · 2010 to 2023
$6.8M
NINDS NIH HHS R25 NS070680NLM NIH HHS T15 LM007093
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveEpilepsy monitoring unit (EMU) admissions are critical for presurgical evaluation of drug-resistant epilepsy but may be nondiagnostic if an insufficient number of seizures are recorded. Seizure forecasting algorithms have shown promise for estimating the likelihood of seizures as a binary event in individual patients, but methods to predict how many seizures will occur remain elusive. Such methods could increase the diagnostic yield of EMU admissions and help patients mitigate seizure-related morbidity. Here, we evaluated the performance of a state-space method that uses prior seizure count data to predict future counts.

methodsA Bayesian negative-binomial dynamic linear model (DLM) was developed to forecast daily electrographic seizure counts in 19 patients implanted with a responsive neurostimulation (RNS) device. Holdout validation was used to evaluate performance in predicting the number of electrographic seizures for forecast horizons ranging 1-7 days ahead.

resultsOne-day-ahead prediction of the number of electrographic seizures using a negative-binomial DLM resulted in improvement over chance in 73.1% of time segments compared to a random chance forecaster and remained >50% for forecast horizons of up to 7 days. Superior performance (mean error = .99) was obtained in predicting the number of electrographic seizures in the next day compared to three traditional methods for count forecasting (integer-valued generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity model or INGARCH, 1.10; Croston, 1.06; generalized linear autoregressive moving average model or GLARMA, 2.00). Number of electrographic seizures in the preceding day and laterality of electrographic pattern detections had highest predictive value, with greater number of electrographic seizures and RNS magnet swipes in the preceding day associated with a higher number of electrographic seizures the next day. SIGNIFICANCE: This study demonstrates that DLMs can predict the number of electrographic seizures a patient will experience days in advance with above chance accuracy. This study represents an important step toward the translation of seizure forecasting methods into the optimization of EMU admissions.

Indexed as

EpilepsyBayes TheoremDiagnostic Techniques and ProceduresHumansSeizuresBayesian inferencecount forecastingepilepsy monitoring unitresponsive neurostimulationseizure prediction

Identifiers

PMID36149301
PMCPMC11025604
OpenAlexW4296793438

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.