ArticlePLOS digital health2025
Evaluating the generalisability of region-naïve machine learning algorithms for the identification of epilepsy in low-resource settings.
Article in PLOS digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Artificial Intelligence for Improving the Management of People With Epilepsy in Low-and-Middle Income Countries.European journal of neurology · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence for personalized multiple micronutrient supplementation in maternal health.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Review
- Modelling seizure-related predictors of epilepsy diagnostic gap in two urban informal settlements of Nairobi using machine learning.Global epidemiology · 2026Article
- Review
- Correction: Evaluating the generalisability of region-naïve machine learning algorithms for the identification of epilepsy in low-resource settings.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
- Epilepsy in low- to middle-income countries.Current opinion in neurology · 2025Review
- Rewiring the brain: the AI revolution in epilepsy treatment.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesApproximately 80% of people with epilepsy live in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where limited resources and stigma hinder accurate diagnosis and treatment. Clinical machine learning models have demonstrated substantial promise in supporting the diagnostic process in LMICs by aiding in preliminary screening and detection of possible epilepsy cases without relying on specialised or trained personnel. How well these models generalise to naïve regions is, however, underexplored. Here, we use a novel approach to assess the suitability and applicability of such clinical tools to aid screening and diagnosis of active convulsive epilepsy in settings beyond their original training contexts.
methodsWe sourced data from the Study of Epidemiology of Epilepsy in Demographic Sites dataset, which includes demographic information and clinical variables related to diagnosing epilepsy across five sub-Saharan African sites. For each site, we developed a region-specific (single-site) predictive model for epilepsy and assessed its performance at other sites. We then iteratively added sites to a multi-site model and evaluated model performance on the omitted regions. Model performances and parameters were then compared across every permutation of sites. We used a leave-one-site-out cross-validation analysis to assess the impact of incorporating individual site data in the model.
resultsSingle-site clinical models performed well within their own regions, but generally worse when evaluated in other regions (p<0.05). Model weights and optimal thresholds varied markedly across sites. When the models were trained using data from an increasing number of sites, mean internal performance decreased while external performance improved.
conclusionsClinical models for epilepsy diagnosis in LMICs demonstrate characteristic traits of ML models, such as limited generalisability and a trade-off between internal and external performance. The relationship between predictors and model outcomes also varies across sites, suggesting the need to update specific model aspects with local data before broader implementation. Variations are likely to be particular to the cultural context of diagnosis. We recommend developing models adapted to the cultures and contexts of their intended deployment and caution against deploying region- and culture-naïve models without thorough prior evaluation.
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.