ArticleScientific reports2025
Critical role of EEG signals in assessment of sex-specific insights in neurological diagnostics via machine learning approach.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Early detection and diagnosis of neurological pathology are essential for timely treatment and intervention. While deep learning has shown promise in analyzing brain imaging data, the influence of sex-specific patterns in electroencephalogram (EEG) signals remains underexplored. In this study, we investigated the detectability and impact of biological sex in EEG data using Artificial Intelligence (AI) methods, with a focus on both biological sex classification and its confounding effects in pathological EEG diagnosis. We employed a lightweight yet effective convolutional neural network and evaluated its performance across three diverse EEG datasets (TUEG, TUAB, and NMT), including both healthy and pathological subjects. Our evaluation leveraged datasets from various sources and participant groups, featuring distribution shifts. Our model achieved balanced accuracy ranging from [Formula: see text] to [Formula: see text] in detecting biological sex from EEG signals, demonstrating the robustness and cross-dataset transferability of sex-related neural patterns. While the AI models demonstrated accurate biological sex detection on datasets without fine-tuning, their performance declined with significant distribution shifts. Furthermore, we explored the relationship between biological sex and pathology by visualizing salient features for target detection across distinct subgroups. Our findings revealed unprecedented insights into the negligible role of sex-specific patterns in pathology detection despite the presence of prominent and consistent patterns within each biological sex group. These findings are critical for advancing the development of more robust and unbiased AI models in disease prediction, as well as for informing treatment paradigms.
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.