ArticleCritical care explorations2022
A Simplified Electroencephalography Montage and Interpretation for Evaluation of Comatose Patients in the ICU.
Article in Critical care explorations, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- A Novel OpenBCI Framework for EEG-Based Neurophysiological Experiments.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Electroencephalography (EEG) is one of the main tools for diagnosis and prognostication of encephalopathy. Our two objectives were to assess: 1) the reliability of intensivists' interpretations (one trained intensivist and nonexpert intensivists) on specific EEG patterns and 2) the feasibility of performing simplified EEG by a trained intensivist in ICU.
designProspective, single-center study.
settingOne French tertiary-care center. PATIENTS: Thirty-six consecutive ICU patients with encephalopathy.
interventionA trained intensivist (1-year specific electrophysiologic course) recorded and interpreted EEGs using a 10 monopod montage at bedside. Then, 22 nonexpert intensivists underwent a 1-hour educational session on interpretation of EEG background (activity, continuity, and reactivity) and common patterns seen in ICU. Trained and nonexpert intensivists' interpretation of EEG recordings was evaluated and compared with an expert neurophysiologist's interpretation (gold standard). The agreement between the two interpretations was evaluated. Second, the duration of the entire EEG procedure (specifically EEG installation) at bedside was recorded. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN
resultsAgreements and reliability between the trained intensivist and the neurophysiologist were acceptable for minimal (agreement, 94%; Pearson coefficient, 0.60) and maximal (89%, 0.89) background frequency, burst suppression (agreement, 100%; Kappa coefficient, 1), background continuity (83%, 0.59), and reactivity to auditory stimulus (78%, 0.44). Agreements between the 22 nonexpert intensivists and the neurophysiologist were heterogeneous. As a result, 87% of the 22 nonexpert intensivists obtained an acceptable reliability for the minimum background frequency, 95% for the maximum background frequency, and 73% and 95% for burst suppression and isoelectric background identification, respectively. The median duration of the entire EEG procedure was 47 minutes (43-53 min), including 22 minutes (20-28 min) of EEG installation.
conclusionsIntensivists can rapidly learn background activity and identify burst-suppression and isoelectric background. However, more educational sessions are required for interpretation of other EEG patterns frequently observed in the ICU setting.
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.