ArticleEpilepsia open2025
Utility and limitations of homemade videos in differentiating functional seizures from other paroxysmal events: An Italian cohort study.
Article in Epilepsia open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
27 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe gold standard for distinguishing epileptic seizures (ES) from non-epileptic events is video-EEG monitoring. In some cases, video alone might suffice, leading to increased utilization of home videos, to support the diagnosis. This study aimed to assess the feasibility of such practice and its accuracy compared to video-EEG, to identify key signs and symptoms of functional seizure (FS) and to establish if self-reported questionnaires would improve diagnostic accuracy.
methodsAll consecutive patients ≥14 years presenting to six Italian epilepsy centers with either recurrent paroxysmal events of uncertain nature or with confirmed ES were enrolled. Subjects had to record home videos of the events and to respond to ad-hoc questionnaires. De-identified data were randomly assigned to pairs of evaluators blinded to the gold standard diagnosis, one epileptologist and one neurologist, to predict the correct diagnosis in two steps: Step 1 (home video alone) and Step 2 (patient's and witness' questionnaires).
resultsNinety-four videos (48 ES; 45 FS; 1 other), obtained from 36 patients, were independently evaluated by the 16 reviewers, providing a total of 188 assessments. Diagnostic accuracy for the whole group was 55.3% among epileptologists and 48.9% among neurologists (p = 0.6892) but was significantly higher in the FS subgroup (71.1%) compared to ES (41.7%) (p = 0.0043). SIGNIFICANCE: Diagnostic accuracy was moderate, without significant differences between epileptologists and neurologists, while it was higher for FS compared to ES. The addition of questionnaires did not improve accuracy. Eye closure for FS and abrupt ending for ES emerged as the only diagnostic signs. Thus, homemade videos have a role in differentiating these disorders. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: This study aimed to assess if home videos can distinguish epileptic seizures from functional seizures. Patients over 14 years from six Italian centers recorded videos of their episodes and answered questionnaires. Data were evaluated by epileptologists and neurologists. Results showed moderate diagnostic accuracy, with higher accuracy for functional seizures compared to epileptic seizures. Key diagnostic signs included eye closure for functional seizures and abrupt endings for epileptic seizures. Questionnaires did not improve accuracy. In conclusion, home videos can help differentiate these events.
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.