ArticleEpilepsia2025
Seizure forecasting by tracking cortical response to electrical stimulation.
Article in Epilepsia, 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.
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveSeizure unpredictability is a significant burden in the lives of people with epilepsy. Previously published approaches to seizure forecasting analyzed intracranial electroencephalography (iEEG) recordings and showed that seizures can be forecast above chance levels. Although passive observation of the brain might provide some insights, repeated active perturbation of the cortex and measuring the cortical response may provide more direct information about time-varying cortical excitability. The aim of this study is to investigate whether seizures can be forecast by stimulating the cortex via intracranial electrodes and measuring cortical response from the iEEG.
methodsWe studied a cohort of eight patients with treatment-resistant epilepsy who were admitted to King's College Hospital for presurgical evaluation with iEEG. During their stay, they underwent prolonged single-pulse electrical stimulation for ~1 day. Stimuli were delivered every 5 min to a constant pair of electrodes, and all patients experienced at least one clinical seizure during the period of stimulation. We extracted quantitative features from the iEEG post-stimulus response and developed a LR algorithm to estimate the seizure likelihood at each stimulus. To evaluate the algorithm's performance, we used improvement over chance (IoC), sensitivity, time spent in warning, and Brier Skill Score. We also compared performance with seizure prediction based on passive observation of iEEG.
resultsIn seven of eight patients, seizures could be forecast using the post-stimulus response above chance levels (average IoC: 0.74). In comparison, the seizure forecasting performance based on passive (unstimulated) iEEG was less good (average IoC: 0.54). SIGNIFICANCE: These results suggest that cortical response to electrical stimulation may aid in the development of seizure forecasting algorithms as well as in the design of novel implantable devices that deliver electrical stimulation to control seizures.
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.