ArticleEpilepsia2025
Reliability and diagnostic accuracy of home video recording in differentiating sleep-related hypermotor epilepsy from disorders of arousal.
Article in Epilepsia, 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.
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
objectiveThis study evaluates the interobserver reliability (IR) and diagnostic accuracy of home video in distinguishing sleep-related hypermotor epilepsy (SHE) from disorders of arousal (DoA) among neurologists with varying levels of expertise. Additionally, it assesses the learning effect in nonexpert raters and extrapolates key diagnostic elements and confounding factors.
methodsWe selected 24 home videos capturing sleep-related events recognized as typical from 12 patients with confirmed SHE and 12 with DoA. During a full-day video session, a panel of 18 experts in epileptology or in sleep medicine and 12 general neurologists and residents were asked to classify each video as "SHE," "DoA," or "unknown," based on the semiology of the event. Baseline IR among all raters and among neurologists before and after experts' discussion was calculated using kappa statistics. The learning effect for nonexperts was assessed using McNemar test by comparing performance before and after training. A thematic analysis of raters' comments was conducted to extrapolate discriminatory features for diagnosis and to identify confounding factors.
resultsThe overall agreement was 75%, with a "moderate" IR (kappa = .56). Raw agreement among experts was 79%, with "substantial" IR (kappa = .62). Among general neurologists, raw agreement improved from 70% to 82% after training, corresponding to "moderate" IR (kappa = .47) and "substantial" IR (kappa = .65), respectively. Disagreement was higher for DoA cases. The thematic analysis identified abrupt onset and brief duration of episodes, ambulatory behavior, and irregular breathing as the main confounders. SIGNIFICANCE: Home video is a reliable tool for distinguishing between SHE and DoA. IR is substantial when assessed by experts and among nonexperts after appropriate educational training. The use of home video as a diagnostic tool is feasible for clinicians with limited access to specialized diagnostic facilities, as well as for sleep and epilepsy specialists, aiding in the diagnostic process and in the follow-up assessment.
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.