ArticleNPJ digital medicine2024
Towards trustworthy seizure onset detection using workflow notes.
Article in NPJ digital medicine, 2024. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Epilepsy-IEDs: An automated machine learning model for detecting interictal epileptiform discharges from scalp electroencephalograms.iScience · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence-based biomarkers for the diagnosis and treatment of neurological conditions: a narrative review.Molecular brain · 2026Review
- An Automated Classifier of Harmful Brain Activities for Clinical Usage Based on a Vision-Inspired Pre-trained Framework.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Generalizable deep learning for photoplethysmography-based blood pressure estimation-A benchmarking study.Machine Learning. Health · 2025Article
- AI-based localization of the epileptogenic zone using intracranial EEG.Epilepsia open · 2025Review
- Fusing convolutional learning and attention-based Bi-LSTM networks for early Alzheimer's diagnosis from EEG signals towards IoMT.Scientific reports · 2024Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
A major barrier to deploying healthcare AI is trustworthiness. One form of trustworthiness is a model's robustness across subgroups: while models may exhibit expert-level performance on aggregate metrics, they often rely on non-causal features, leading to errors in hidden subgroups. To take a step closer towards trustworthy seizure onset detection from EEG, we propose to leverage annotations that are produced by healthcare personnel in routine clinical workflows-which we refer to as workflow notes-that include multiple event descriptions beyond seizures. Using workflow notes, we first show that by scaling training data to 68,920 EEG hours, seizure onset detection performance significantly improves by 12.3 AUROC (Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic) points compared to relying on smaller training sets with gold-standard labels. Second, we reveal that our binary seizure onset detection model underperforms on clinically relevant subgroups (e.g., up to a margin of 6.5 AUROC points between pediatrics and adults), while having significantly higher FPRs (False Positive Rates) on EEG clips showing non-epileptiform abnormalities (+19 FPR points). To improve model robustness to hidden subgroups, we train a multilabel model that classifies 26 attributes other than seizures (e.g., spikes and movement artifacts) and significantly improve overall performance (+5.9 AUROC points) while greatly improving performance among subgroups (up to +8.3 AUROC points) and decreasing false positives on non-epileptiform abnormalities (by 8 FPR points). Finally, we find that our multilabel model improves clinical utility (false positives per 24 EEG hours) by a factor of 2×.
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.