ArticleBMC medicine2025
Development and validation of a multimodal automatic interictal epileptiform discharge detection model: a prospective multi-center study.
Article in BMC medicine, 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.
- Vision-Based Artificial Intelligence Technologies for Epilepsy Monitoring: Scoping Review and Taxonomy Development Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence for automated detection of interictal epileptiform discharges: methodological progress, clinical evaluation, and neurodevelopmental context.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVisual identification of interictal epileptiform discharge (IED) is expert-biased and time-consuming. Accurate automated IED detection models can facilitate epilepsy diagnosis. This study aims to develop a multimodal IED detection model (vEpiNetV2) and conduct a multi-center validation.
methodsWe constructed a large training dataset to train vEpiNetV2, which comprises 26,706 IEDs and 194,797 non-IED 4-s video-EEG epochs from 530 patients at Peking Union Medical College Hospital (PUMCH). The automated IED detection model was constructed using deep learning based on video and electroencephalogram (EEG) features. We proposed a bad channel removal model and patient detection method to improve the robustness of vEpiNetV2 for multi-center validation. Performance is verified in a prospective multi-center test dataset, with area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC) and area under the curve (AUC) as metrics.
resultsTo fairly evaluate the model performance, we constructed a large test dataset containing 149 patients, 377 h video-EEG data, and 9232 IEDs from PUMCH, Children's Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University (SDQLCH) and Beijing Tiantan Hospital (BJTTH). Amplitude discrepancies are observed across centers and could be classified by a classifier. vEpiNetV2 demonstrated favorable accuracy for the IED detection, achieving AUPRC/AUC values of 0.76/0.98 (PUMCH), 0.78/0.96 (SDQLCH), and 0.76/0.98 (BJTTH), with false positive rates of 0.16-0.31 per minute at 80% sensitivity. Incorporating video features improves precision by 9%, 7%, and 5% at three centers, respectively. At 95% sensitivity, video features eliminated 24% false positives in the whole test dataset. While bad channels decreased model precision, video features compensate for this deficiency. Accurate patient detection is essential; otherwise, incorrect patient detection can negatively impact overall performance.
conclusionsThe multimodal IED detection model, which integrates video and EEG features, demonstrated high precision and robustness. The large multi-center validation confirmed its potential for real-world clinical application and the value of video features in IED analysis.
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.