ArticleEpilepsia open2023
Epilepsy classification using artificial intelligence: A web-based application.
Article in Epilepsia open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Epileptogenesis and Epilepsy Treatment: Advances in Mechanistic Understanding, Therapeutic Approaches, and Future Perspectives.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Graph Attention Networks for Detecting Epilepsy From EEG Signals Using Accessible Hardware in Low-Resource Settings.IEEE open journal of engineering in medicine and biology · 2026Article
- Enhancing Diagnostic Accuracy of Neurological Disorders Through Feature-Driven Multi-Class Classification with Machine Learning.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Resting state EEG microstate profiling and a machine-learning based classifier model in epilepsy.Cognitive neurodynamics · 2024Article
- Artificial Intelligence as A Complementary Tool for Clincal Decision-Making in Stroke and Epilepsy.Brain sciences · 2024Review
- Epilepsy classification using artificial intelligence: A web-based application.Epilepsia open · 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
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe purpose of the current endeavor was to evaluate the feasibility of using easily accessible and applicable clinical information (based on history taking and physical examination) in order to make a reliable differentiation between idiopathic generalized epilepsy (IGE) versus focal epilepsy using machine learning (ML) methods.
methodsThe first phase of the study was a retrospective study of a prospectively developed and maintained database. All patients with an electro-clinical diagnosis of IGE or focal epilepsy, at the outpatient epilepsy clinic at Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran, from 2008 until 2022, were included. The first author selected a set of clinical features. Using the stratified random portioning method, the dataset was divided into the train (70%) and test (30%) subsets. Different types of classifiers were assessed and the final classification was made based on their best results using the stacking method.
resultsA total number of 1445 patients were studied; 964 with focal epilepsy and 481 with IGE. The stacking classifier led to better results than the base classifiers in general. This algorithm has the following characteristics: precision: 0.81, sensitivity: 0.81, and specificity: 0.77. SIGNIFICANCE: We developed a pragmatic algorithm aimed at facilitating epilepsy classification for individuals whose epilepsy begins at age 10 years and older. Also, in order to enable and facilitate future external validation studies by other peers and professionals, the developed and trained ML model was implemented and published via an online web-based application that is freely available at http://www.epiclass.ir/f-ige.
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.