ArticleBMJ open2022
Real-time seizure detection in paediatric intensive care patients: the RESET child brain protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial Intelligence in Pediatric Epilepsy Detection: Balancing Effectiveness With Ethical Considerations for Welfare.Health science reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionApproximately 20%-40% of comatose children with risk factors in intensive care have electrographic-only seizures; these go unrecognised due to the absence of continuous electroencephalography (EEG) monitoring (cEEG). Utility of cEEG with high-quality assessment is currently limited due to high-resource requirements. New software analysis tools are available to facilitate bedside cEEG assessment using quantitative EEG (QEEG) trends. The primary aim of this study is to describe accuracy of interpretation of QEEG trends by paediatric intensive care unit (PICU) nurses compared with cEEG assessment by neurologist (standard clinical care) in children at risk of seizures and status epilepticus utilising diagnostic test statistics. The secondary aims are to determine time to seizure detection for QEEG users compared with standard clinical care and describe impact of confounders on accuracy of seizure detection. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This will be a single-centre, prospective observational cohort study evaluating a paediatric QEEG programme utilising the full 19 electrode set. The setting will be a 36-bed quaternary PICU with medical, cardiac and general surgical cases. cEEG studies in PICU patients identified as 'at risk of seizures' will be analysed. Trained bedside clinical nurses will interpret the QEEG. Seizure events will be marked as seizures if >3 QEEG criteria occur. Post-hoc dedicated neurologists, who remain blinded to the QEEG analysis, will interpret the cEEG. Determination of standard test characteristics will assess the primary hypothesis. To calculate 95% (CIs) around the sensitivity and specificity estimates with a CI width of 10%, the sample size needed for sensitivity is 80 patients assuming each EEG will have approximately 9 to 18 1-hour epochs. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has received approval by the Children's Health Queensland Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC/19/QCHQ/58145). Results will be made available to the funders, critical care survivors and their caregivers, the relevant societies, and other researchers. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) 12621001471875.
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.