ReviewJournal of epilepsy research2025
Artificial Intelligence in Epilepsy: A Systemic Review.
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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Heart-Brain Axis in the Artificial Intelligence Era: Integrating Old and New Insights Towards New Targeting and Innovative Neuro- and Cardio-Therapeutics.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.