ArticleiScience2025
Robust epileptic seizure prediction: A 3D-SERESNet framework for patient-specific and multi-patient generalization.
Article in iScience, 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.
- Patient-independent hybrid generative-discriminative modeling for seizure detection in long-term scalp EEG.Scientific reports · 2026Article
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
Epilepsy is a prevalent neurological disorder. Effective seizure prediction methods can warn of impending seizures, enabling patients to take preemptive measures. In this study, we propose an efficient epilepsy prediction model, 3D-SERESNet (squeeze-and-excitation residual network). We use short-time fourier transform (STFT) to convert EEG segments into time-frequency representations. We construct 3D representations from these time-frequency graphs, which serve as input to a subsequent 3D residual network designed to learn spatio-spectral features hierarchically. To address data imbalance, we employ the focal loss function. We evaluated the model's performance on the CHB-MIT dataset under both patient-specific and patient-independent settings. The model achieved an average sensitivity of 90.77% with a false positive rate (FPR) of 0.090/h in patient-specific experiments, and 84.41% sensitivity with 0.232/h FPR in patient-independent experiments.
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.