ArticleEpilepsia2025
Scalp high-frequency oscillation spatial distribution is consistent over consecutive nights, while rates vary with antiseizure medication changes.
Article in Epilepsia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Influence of Recording Duration and Vigilance State on High-Frequency Oscillation Characterization in Epilepsy.Neurology · 2026Article
- The use of quantitative electroencephalography in evaluating epilepsy treatment.Acta epileptologica · 2026Review
- Inroads into epilepsy through high-frequency oscillations: Achievements and benchmark areas for improvement.Epilepsia · 2026Review
- Scalp high-frequency activity differentiates neonates with seizures from healthy neonates and indicates postneonatal epilepsy risk.Epilepsia · 2026Article
- Opposing interictal dynamics in Alzheimer's disease and epilepsy.Progress in neurobiology · 2026Article
- PyHFO 2.0: an open-source platform for deep learning-based clinical high-frequency oscillations analysis.Journal of neural engineering · 2025Article
- Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to investigate two key aspects of scalp high-frequency oscillations (HFOs) in pediatric focal lesional epilepsy: (1) the stability of scalp HFO spatial distribution across consecutive nights, and (2) the variation in scalp HFO rates in response to changes in antiseizure medication (ASM).
methodsWe analyzed 81 whole-night scalp electroencephalography (EEG) recordings from 20 children with focal lesional epilepsy. We used a previously validated automated HFO detector to assess scalp HFO rates (80-250 Hz) during non-rapid eye movement (NREM) sleep. The spatial distribution of HFO rates across consecutive nights was evaluated using Hamming similarity, and changes in ASM were classified as increased, decreased, or stable.
resultsFor each patient, we analyzed 3 ± 1 whole-night scalp EEG recordings, with a mean duration of 650 ± 215 min per recording. The distribution of HFO remained stable across consecutive nights, with a Hamming similarity of 88% ± 6%. Four patients had at least one ASM dosage decrease, nine patients had both ASM dosage decreases and increases, two patients had only ASM dosage increases, and five patients had no changes in ASM during the study period. A decrease in ASM dosage was associated with increased HFO rates (from .16 ± .32 to .22 ± .36 HFO/min; p = .03), whereas an increase in ASM dosage led to decreased HFO rates (from .32 ± .54 HFO/min to .22 ± .38 HFO/min; p = .005) when comparing the last night to the first. SIGNIFICANCE: The spatial distribution of scalp HFOs remained consistent across multiple nights, whereas fluctuations in HFO rates correlated with changes in ASM dosage. These findings suggest that scalp HFOs may not only help identify epileptogenic brain tissue but also monitor treatment response.
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.