Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40568057›Full record

ReviewJournal of epilepsy research2025

Artificial Intelligence in Epilepsy: A Systemic Review.

Almuntasar Al-Breiki, Said Al-Sinani, Ahmed Elsharaawy, Mohamed Usama, Tariq Al-Saadi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of epilepsy research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

5 authors.

Almuntasar Al-BreikiCollege of Medicine and Health Sciences, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Oman.
Said Al-SinaniCollege of Medicine and Health Sciences, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Oman.
Ahmed ElsharaawyNational University of Science and Technology, Sohar, Oman.
Mohamed UsamaNational University of Science and Technology, Sohar, Oman.
Tariq Al-SaadiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Diagnosing and managing epilepsy is difficult for doctors. Surgery can help some patients, but it often takes a long time to get there. This research looks at scientific studies to see if artificial intelligence and machine learning (ML) can be used to improve epilepsy treatment. In-depth research was conducted across PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Wiley, Web of Science, and Microsoft Academia. This search focused on studies exploring the use of ML for diagnosing epilepsy, predicting treatment response, and predicting outcomes of epilepsy surgery. The search was limited to original English-language articles published between 2015 and 2022. This review examined 36 studies on using ML to predict epilepsy. The studies fell into four categories: general diagnosis (27), treatment outcome (3), identifying surgical candidates (2), and predicting surgical results (4). Researchers employed a diverse set of data, including symptoms and brain scans, alongside machine learning algorithms like support vector machines and convolutional neural networks, to construct their models. Some models achieved impressive results with areas under the curve reaching up to 0.99, but most studies were limited by small sample sizes and a lack of independent validation. ML shows potential for epilepsy treatment based on initial studies, but real-world use is restricted due to small sample sizes and the need for more validation from other studies. Large collaborative research efforts and data on long-term outcomes are essential before ML can be widely adopted by doctors and make a positive difference for epilepsy patients.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceConvolutional neural networkEEGEpilepsyMachine learningSeizure

Identifiers

PMID40568057
PMCPMC12185921

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.