ArticleBioelectronic medicine2024
Using a standalone ear-EEG device for focal-onset seizure detection.
Article in Bioelectronic medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Recent Progress in In-Ear EEG Technology and Its Emerging Real-World Applications: A Review.Micromachines · 2026Review
- A novel, wearable, in-ear EEG technology to assess sleep and daytime sleepiness.Bioelectronic medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Objective outcome assessment in epilepsy surgery using ultralong-term subcutaneous EEG: A case report.Epilepsia open · 2026Article
- In-ear EEG wearables for brain activity assessment and cognitive rehabilitation: the emerging role of multimodal embedded intelligence.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2026Review
- Review
- Clinical utility of in-ear EEG electrodes in hospitalized patients: comparison with standard scalp EEG.Clinical neurophysiology practice · 2026Article
- The Next Frontier in Brain Monitoring: A Comprehensive Look at In-Ear EEG Electrodes and Their Applications.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Predicting seizure episodes and high-risk events in autism through adverse behavioral patterns.Physiological measurement · 2025Article
- Seizure Detection Devices.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Predicting Seizures Episodes and High-Risk Events in Autism Through Adverse Behavioral Patterns.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Hearables: Bioelectronics technological challenges and opportunities.Wearable technologies · 2025Review
- Article
- Evaluating the Electroencephalographic Signal Quality of an In-Ear Wearable Device.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- The present and future of seizure detection, prediction, and forecasting with machine learning, including the future impact on clinical trials.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Review
- Signal quality evaluation of an in-ear EEG device in comparison to a conventional cap system.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2024Article
- Artificial intelligence in wearable seizure detection devices: current technologies and future directions.Frontiers in neurologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeizure detection is challenging outside the clinical environment due to the lack of comfortable, reliable, and practical long-term neurophysiological monitoring devices. We developed a novel, discreet, unobstructive in-ear sensing system that enables long-term electroencephalography (EEG) recording. This is the first study we are aware of that systematically compares the seizure detection utility of in-ear EEG with that of simultaneously recorded intracranial EEG. In addition, we present a similar comparison between simultaneously recorded in-ear EEG and scalp EEG.
methodsIn this foundational research, we conducted a clinical feasibility study and validated the ability of the ear-EEG system to capture focal-onset seizures against 1255 hrs of simultaneous ear-EEG data along with scalp or intracranial EEG in 20 patients with refractory focal epilepsy (11 with scalp EEG, 8 with intracranial EEG, and 1 with both).
resultsIn a blinded, independent review of the ear-EEG signals, two epileptologists were able to detect 86.4% of the seizures that were subsequently identified using the clinical gold standard EEG modalities, with a false detection rate of 0.1 per day, well below what has been reported for ambulatory monitoring. The few seizures not detected on the ear-EEG signals emanated from deep within the mesial temporal lobe or extra-temporally and remained very focal, without significant propagation. Following multiple sessions of recording for a median continuous wear time of 13 hrs, patients reported a high degree of tolerance for the device, with only minor adverse events reported by the scalp EEG cohort.
conclusionsThese preliminary results demonstrate the potential of using ear-EEG to enable routine collection of complementary, prolonged, and remote neurophysiological evidence, which may permit real-time detection of paroxysmal events such as seizures and epileptiform discharges. This study suggests that the ear-EEG device may assist clinicians in making an epilepsy diagnosis, assessing treatment efficacy, and optimizing medication titration.
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.