ArticleNeuroImage. Clinical2023
An extended clinical EEG dataset with 15,300 automatically labelled recordings for pathology decoding.
Article in NeuroImage. Clinical, 2023. 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.
- Clinical application of artificial intelligence technology in epilepsy.Acta epileptologica · 2026Review
- Machine-Learning-Enabled Hydrogel Biosensors for Wearable Health Monitoring.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence as a surrogate brain: bridging neural dynamical models and data.National science review · 2026Review
- A comprehensive EEG dataset of laser-evoked potentials for pain research.Scientific data · 2025Article
- Automatic diagnostics of electroencephalography pathology based on multi-domain feature fusion.PloS one · 2025Article
- Brain age revisited: Investigating the state vs. trait hypotheses of EEG-derived brain-age dynamics with deep learning.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2024Article
- Automatic Detection of Abnormal EEG Signals Using WaveNet and LSTM.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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Automated clinical EEG analysis using machine learning (ML) methods is a growing EEG research area. Previous studies on binary EEG pathology decoding have mainly used the Temple University Hospital (TUH) Abnormal EEG Corpus (TUAB) which contains approximately 3,000 manually labelled EEG recordings. To evaluate and eventually even improve the generalisation performance of machine learning methods for EEG pathology, decoding larger, publicly available datasets is required. A number of studies addressed the automatic labelling of large open-source datasets as an approach to create new datasets for EEG pathology decoding, but little is known about the extent to which training on larger, automatically labelled dataset affects decoding performances of established deep neural networks. In this study, we automatically created additional pathology labels for the Temple University Hospital (TUH) EEG Corpus (TUEG) based on the medical reports using a rule-based text classifier. We generated a dataset of 15,300 newly labelled recordings, which we call the TUH Abnormal Expansion EEG Corpus (TUABEX), and which is five times larger than the TUAB. Since the TUABEX contains more pathological (75%) than non-pathological (25%) recordings, we then selected a balanced subset of 8,879 recordings, the TUH Abnormal Expansion Balanced EEG Corpus (TUABEXB). To investigate how training on a larger, automatically labelled dataset affects the decoding performance of deep neural networks, we applied four established deep convolutional neural networks (ConvNets) to the task of pathological versus non-pathological classification and compared the performance of each architecture after training on different datasets. The results show that training on the automatically labelled TUABEXB dataset rather than training on the manually labelled TUAB dataset increases accuracies on TUABEXB and even for TUAB itself for some architectures. We argue that automatically labelling of large open-source datasets can be used to efficiently utilise the massive amount of EEG data stored in clinical archives. We make the proposed TUABEXB available open source and thus offer a new dataset for EEG machine learning research.
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.