ArticleNeurology. Clinical practice2023
Diagnostic Accuracy of Ambulatory EEG vs Routine EEG in Patients With First Single Unprovoked Seizure.
Article in Neurology. Clinical practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and validation of a deep survival model to predict time to seizure from routine electroencephalography.Epilepsia · 2026Article
- 24-Hour Video EEG in the Evaluation of the Seizure-Free Patient Before Antiseizure Medication Withdrawal.Journal of clinical neurophysiology : official publication of the American Electroencephalographic Society · 2026Article
- HRV features as potential biomarkers for auxiliary diagnosis in epilepsy.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Improving Standardization and Access to Care via Seizure Pathways in the Emergency Department.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Prognostic value of interictal epileptiform discharges on routine EEG in adults with epilepsy.Epilepsia · 2025Article
- Computer-assisted analysis of routine EEG to identify hidden biomarkers of epilepsy: A systematic review.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2024Review
- Neuronal current imaging of epileptic activity: An MRI study in patients with a first unprovoked epileptic seizure.Epilepsia open · 2024Observational
- Current state of the epilepsy drug and device pipeline.Epilepsia · 2024Review
- Routine EEG vs Ambulatory EEG for a First Seizure: Once Bitten, Twice Shy?Neurology. Clinical practice · 2023Article
- Interictal epileptiform discharges in Alzheimer's disease: prevalence, relevance, and controversies.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Review
- Get Out the Door: Ambulatory EEG Trumps Routine EEG in the Detection of Interictal Epileptiform Abnormalities After a First Unprovoked Seizure.Epilepsy currentsArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the ambulatory EEG (aEEG) at detecting interictal epileptiform discharges (IEDs)/seizures compared with routine EEG (rEEG) and repetitive/second rEEG in patients with a first single unprovoked seizure (FSUS). We also evaluated the association between IED/seizures on aEEG and seizure recurrence within 1 year of follow-up. Methods: We prospectively evaluated 100 consecutive patients with FSUS at the provincial Single Seizure Clinic. They underwent 3 sequential EEG modalities: first rEEG, second rEEG, and aEEG. Clinical epilepsy diagnosis was ascertained based on the 2014 International League Against Epilepsy definition by a neurologist/epileptologist at the clinic. An EEG-certified epileptologist/neurologist interpreted all 3 EEGs. All patients were followed up for 52 weeks until they had either second unprovoked seizure or maintained single seizure status. Accuracy measures (sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive values, and likelihood ratios), receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, and area under the curve (AUC) were used to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of each EEG modality. Life tables and the Cox proportional hazard model were used to estimate the probability and association of seizure recurrence. Results: Ambulatory EEG captured IED/seizures with a sensitivity of 72%, compared with 11% for the first rEEG and 22% for the second rEEG. The diagnostic performance of the aEEG was statistically better (AUC: 0.85) compared with the first rEEG (AUC: 0.56) and second rEEG (AUC: 0.60). There were no statistically significant differences between the 3 EEG modalities regarding specificity and positive predictive value. Finally, IED/seizure on the aEEG was associated with more than 3 times the hazard of seizure recurrence. Discussion: The overall diagnostic accuracy of aEEG at capturing IED/seizures in people presenting with FSUS was higher than the first and second rEEGs. We also found that IED/seizures on the aEEG were associated with an increased risk of seizure recurrence. Classification of Evidence: This study provides Class I evidence supporting that, in adults with First Single Unprovoked Seizure (FSUS), 24-h ambulatory EEG has increased sensitivity when compared with routine and repeated EEG.
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.