Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41303111›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2025

Not All Spikes Are Equal.

Anita N Datta

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 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. Clinical Advances in Child Neurology.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026
    Article
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

1 author.

Anita N DattaDepartment of Pediatrics, Division of Neurology, BC Children's Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia Vancouver, 4480 Oak Street, Vancouver, BC V6H 3N1, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-7620-4868

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

EEG remains the primary diagnostic tool for evaluating seizures in children, with interictal epileptiform discharges (IEDs) serving as key biomarkers of epileptogenic activity. However, not all IEDs have the same prognostic significance. Variations in IED topography, morphology, frequency, and timing influence outcomes in pediatric epilepsy. The developing brain's maturation affects IED location and features, creating age-specific patterns with distinct implications. For example, occipital and midline IEDs are common in young children, with midline IEDs strongly linked to increased seizures and developmental delay than control patients. Morphological features provide additional prognostic stratification. While centrotemporal IEDs with tangential dipoles are well-established as favorable prognostic markers, IEDs exhibiting tangential dipoles in any brain region are associated with more benign clinical courses than control patients. Conversely, positive sharp waves persisting beyond the neonatal period signal less favorable prognosis, including developmental delay, abnormal neurological examination, and structural brain abnormalities. Additionally, IEDs occurring on ripples have been shown to serve as more reliable interictal biomarkers of the epileptogenic zone than IEDs or ripples alone. Topography, frequency and sleep-state dependence also carry clinical significance, as frequent IEDs during slow-wave sleep may impact cognition. Furthermore, the temporal context of IED occurrence during seizure onset, treatment, activation procedures, medication withdrawal, or after epilepsy surgery provides valuable prognostic information. Recognition of these nuanced electrophysiological distinctions enhances clinicians' ability to predict clinical trajectories and optimize long-term management strategies.

Indexed as

childrenEEGneurodevelopmental disordersnon-invasiverefractory epilepsy

Identifiers

PMID41303111
PMCPMC12653129

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.