ArticleEpilepsia2026
Quantifying the impact of a computer-aided diagnostic score on the clinical diagnosis of functional seizures.
Article in Epilepsia, 2026. 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
39 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe diagnosis of functional/dissociative seizures (FDS) without ictal video-electroencephalography is challenging. The Functional/Dissociative Seizures Likelihood Score (FSLS) is a machine learning-based diagnostic score that aims to help clinicians identify FDS. We evaluated whether a human-in-the-loop implementation of the FSLS improved the performance of clinicians identifying FDS as compared to epileptic seizures (ES).
methodsWe constructed 117 anonymized cases about patients with ictal video-electroencephalography-documented FDS, epilepsy, co-occurring ES and FDS, or physiological seizurelike events. Text-based clinical history was presented followed by the FSLS. Readers were asked the most likely diagnosis after each piece of information. We used mixture modeling combined with mixed effects logistic regression to perform data-driven grouping of participants based on observed patterns of diagnostic performance.
resultsOverall, 163 readers saw 1142 cases (median = 4 cases/reader), and 146 (90%) had a performance higher than chance. More formal training in seizures was associated with better performance (epileptologist accuracy = 67%, mental health clinician accuracy = 52%). Data-driven groups including 66% of readers benefitted from the FSLS (accuracy improvement = 12%-15%, p < .05), including those in the reference and near highest baseline performance group. Other groups had no net change in performance (p > .75). SIGNIFICANCE: Clinicians with more formal seizure training identified possible FDS more accurately than others, but formal training did not guarantee high diagnostic performance. Two performance-based groups, which included 66% readers, benefitted from the FSLS because they identified when to change their mind on the basis of the FSLS's suggestion. The implementation of machine learning in the diagnosis of FDS should focus on identifying clinical settings where it can effectively enhance clinicians' decision-making.
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.