Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39427024›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Deep learning based automatic detection and dipole estimation of epileptic discharges in MEG: a multi-center study.

Ryoji Hirano, Miyako Asai, Nobukazu Nakasato, Akitake Kanno, Takehiro Uda, Naohiro Tsuyuguchi, Masaki Yoshimura, Yoshihito Shigihara, Toyoji Okada, Masayuki Hirata

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Ryoji HiranoDigital Strategy Division, Ricoh, Ebina, 243-0460, Japan. ryohji.hirano@jp.ricoh.com.
Miyako AsaiDigital Strategy Division, Ricoh, Ebina, 243-0460, Japan.
Nobukazu NakasatoDepartment of Epileptology, Tohoku University School of Medicine, Sendai, 980-8575, Japan.
Akitake KannoDepartment of Epileptology, Tohoku University School of Medicine, Sendai, 980-8575, Japan.
Takehiro UdaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Osaka Metropolitan University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, 545-8586, Japan.
Naohiro TsuyuguchiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Osaka Metropolitan University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, 545-8586, Japan.
Masaki YoshimuraNational Epilepsy Center, Shizuoka Institute of Epilepsy and Neurological Disorders, Shizuoka, 420-8688, Japan.
Yoshihito ShigiharaPrecision Medicine Centre, Kumagaya General Hospital, Kumagaya, 360-8567, Japan.
Toyoji OkadaDepartment of Clinical Laboratory, Hokuto Hospital, Obihiro, 080-0833, Japan.
Masayuki HirataDepartment of Neurological Diagnosis and Restoration, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, 565-0871, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Magnetoencephalography (MEG) provides crucial information in diagnosing focal epilepsy. However, dipole estimation, a commonly used analysis method for MEG, can be time-consuming since it necessitates neurophysiologists to manually identify epileptic spikes. To reduce this burden, we developed the automatic detection of spikes using deep learning in single center. In this study, we performed a multi-center study using six MEG centers to improve the performance of the automated detection of neuromagnetically recorded epileptic spikes, which we previously developed using deep learning. Data from four centers were used for training and evaluation (internal data), and the remaining two centers were used for evaluation only (external data). We used a five-fold subject-wise cross-validation technique to train and evaluate the models. A comparison showed that the multi-center model outperformed the single-center model in terms of performance. The multi-center model achieved an average ROC-AUC of 0.9929 and 0.9426 for the internal and external data, respectively. The median distance between the neurophysiologist-analyzed and automatically analyzed dipoles was 4.36 and 7.23 mm for the multi-center model for internal and external data, respectively, indicating accurate detection of epileptic spikes. By training data from multiple centers, automated analysis can improve spike detection and reduce the analysis workload for neurophysiologists. This study suggests that the multi-center model has the potential to detect spikes within 1 cm of a neurophysiologist's analysis. This multi-center model can significantly reduce the number of hours required by neurophysiologists to detect spikes.

Indexed as

Deep LearningEpilepsyMagnetoencephalographyAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedYoung AdultClassificationDeep learningMagnetoencephalographyMulticenter studySegmentationTime series analysis

Identifiers

PMID39427024
PMCPMC11490499

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.