ArticleEpilepsia2025
Supervised machine learning compared to large language models for identifying functional seizures from medical records.
Article in Epilepsia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Modern generative large language models in epilepsy care: a scoping review of current applications, challenges, and future directions.Acta epileptologica · 2026Review
- Diagnostic accuracy of multimodal large language models in differentiating epileptic from functional seizures in smartphone recorded videos.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Quantifying the impact of a computer-aided diagnostic score on the clinical diagnosis of functional seizures.Epilepsia · 2026Article
- An Automated Classifier of Harmful Brain Activities for Clinical Usage Based on a Vision-Inspired Pre-trained Framework.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Supervised machine learning compared to large language models for identifying functional seizures from medical records.Epilepsia · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe Functional Seizures Likelihood Score (FSLS) is a supervised machine learning-based diagnostic score that was developed to differentiate functional seizures (FS) from epileptic seizures (ES). In contrast to this targeted approach, large language models (LLMs) can identify patterns in data for which they were not specifically trained. To evaluate the relative benefits of each approach, we compared the diagnostic performance of the FSLS to two LLMs: ChatGPT and GPT-4.
methodsIn total, 114 anonymized cases were constructed based on patients with documented FS, ES, mixed ES and FS, or physiologic seizure-like events (PSLEs). Text-based data were presented in three sequential prompts to the LLMs, showing the history of present illness (HPI), electroencephalography (EEG) results, and neuroimaging results. We compared the accuracy (number of correct predictions/number of cases) and area under the receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves (AUCs) of the LLMs to the FSLS using mixed-effects logistic regression.
resultsThe accuracy of FSLS was 74% (95% confidence interval [CI] 65%-82%) and the AUC was 85% (95% CI 77%-92%). GPT-4 was superior to both the FSLS and ChatGPT (p <.001), with an accuracy of 85% (95% CI 77%-91%) and AUC of 87% (95% CI 79%-95%). Cohen's kappa between the FSLS and GPT-4 was 40% (fair). The LLMs provided different predictions on different days when the same note was provided for 33% of patients, and the LLM's self-rated certainty was moderately correlated with this observed variability (Spearman's rho SIGNIFICANCE: Both GPT-4 and the FSLS identified a substantial subset of patients with FS based on clinical history. The fair agreement in predictions highlights that the LLMs identified patients differently from the structured score. The inconsistency of the LLMs' predictions across days and incomplete insight into their own consistency was concerning. This comparison highlights both benefits and cautions about how machine learning and artificial intelligence could identify patients with FS in clinical practice.
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.