ArticleBrain communications2023
Limited clinical validity of univariate resting-state EEG markers for classifying seizure disorders.
Article in Brain communications, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Fusion of Multi-Paradigm EEG Microstate Features to Enhance the Recognition of Mild Cognitive Impairment.Brain and behavior · 2026Article
- The Functional Neurological Disorder special collection inBrain communications · 2026Article
- Improving diagnostic accuracy of routine EEG for epilepsy using deep learning.Brain communications · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Differentiating between epilepsy and psychogenic non-epileptic seizures presents a considerable challenge in clinical practice, resulting in frequent misdiagnosis, unnecessary treatment and long diagnostic delays. Quantitative markers extracted from resting-state EEG may reveal subtle neurophysiological differences that are diagnostically relevant. Two observational, retrospective diagnostic accuracy studies were performed to test the clinical validity of univariate resting-state EEG markers for the differential diagnosis of epilepsy and psychogenic non-epileptic seizures. Clinical EEG data were collected for 179 quasi-consecutive patients (age > 18) with a suspected diagnosis of epilepsy or psychogenic non-epileptic seizures who were medication-naïve at the time of EEG; 148 age- and gender-matched patients subsequently received a diagnosis from specialist clinicians and were included in the analyses. Study 1 is a hypothesis-driven study testing the ability of theta power and peak alpha frequency to classify people with epilepsy and people with psychogenic non-epileptic seizures, with an advanced machine learning pipeline. The next study (Study 2) is data-driven; a high number of quantitative EEG features are extracted and a similar machine learning approach as Study 1 assesses whether previously unexplored univariate EEG measures show promise as diagnostic markers. The results of Study 1 suggest that EEG markers that were previously identified as promising diagnostic indicators (i.e. theta power and peak alpha frequency) have limited clinical validity for the classification of epilepsy and psychogenic non-epileptic seizures (mean accuracy: 48%). The results of Study 2 indicate that identifying univariate markers that show good correlation with a categorical diagnostic label is challenging (mean accuracy: 45-60%). This is due to a considerable overlap in neurophysiological features between the diagnostic classes considered in this study, and to the presence of more dominant EEG dynamics such as alterations due to temporal proximity to epileptiform discharges. Markers that were identified in the context of previous epilepsy research using visually normal resting-state EEG were found to have limited clinical validity for the classification task of distinguishing between people with epilepsy and people with psychogenic non-epileptic seizures. A search for alternative diagnostic markers uncovered the challenges involved and generated recommendations for further 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.