ArticleEpilepsia open2025
How to report neurotechnology and artificial intelligence studies in epilepsy: Peer-review-inspired recommendations.
Article in Epilepsia open, 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.
- Artificial intelligence for pediatric neuroimaging.Pediatric radiology · 2026Review
- Mechanism-Driven Translation of Electroacupuncture for Depression: Bridging the Gap Between Preclinical and Clinical Research.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe integration of neurotechnology and artificial intelligence (AI) in epilepsy research has led to significant advancements in diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment. However, the impact of these innovations is often diminished by inadequate and inaccurate reporting, limiting their reproducibility and implementation. This study aimed to identify common peer review concerns and develop reporting recommendations specific to neurotechnology and AI studies in epilepsy.
methodsWe conducted a qualitative analysis of peer review comments from original research article submissions to Epilepsia Open over a 2-year period (September 2021-August 2023). We selected manuscripts that focused on neurotechnology or AI applications in epilepsy, excluding those using standard clinical technologies or conventional statistical analyses. Reviewer comments were classified using a validated checklist, categorizing issues into themes and subthemes. Based on recurrent peer review concerns, we developed a set of reporting recommendations for neurotechnology and AI studies.
resultsAmong 329 manuscripts sent for peer review, 67 were classified as neurotechnology or AI studies and included in the analysis. These studies predominantly involved advanced neuroimaging analysis, advanced electroencephalography (EEG) analysis, and neuromodulation systems. Reviewer comments were primarily focused on study methodology (37%), manuscript presentation (19%), discussion (17%), and results (12%). Based on peer review comments, we formulated reporting recommendations, hoping to enhance study transparency, methodological rigor, and reproducibility. SIGNIFICANCE: Our reporting recommendations address key concerns raised during peer review, providing guidance to authors and reviewers to improve the quality and clarity of neurotechnology and AI research in epilepsy. These recommendations complement existing reporting standards and contribute to the advancement of robust and impactful research in the field. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: We studied how researchers report studies on neurotechnology and AI in epilepsy. Many studies face problems during peer review, such as unclear methods, weak study rationale, and errors in statistics or citations. We analyzed reviewer feedback and created recommendations to improve how these studies are reported. Our goal is to help researchers develop and present their work more clearly and accurately, making it easier for others to understand and build upon their findings. This can lead to better use of AI and neurotechnology in epilepsy research and care.
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.