ArticleBMJ neurology open2026
Seizure burden and treatment efficacy evaluation in anti-LGI1 autoimmune encephalitis patients using wearable device: a pilot feasibility study.
Article in BMJ neurology open, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Patients with anti-leucine-rich glioma-inactivated 1 (anti-LGI1) autoimmune encephalitis (AIE) frequently present with faciobrachial dystonic seizures (FBDS), which are often under-detected due to their subtle motor features and lack of consistent EEG correlates. Conventional in-hospital monitoring and patient-reported seizure diaries are limited, particularly during nocturnal periods. In this pilot feasibility study, we evaluated the use of a wearable device (Empatica E4) to objectively monitor FBDS-related motor and autonomic activity in seven patients with anti-LGI1 AIE and four control subjects. Methods: Wearable recordings included accelerometry (ACC), electrodermal activity (EDA), photoplethysmography (PPG) and skin temperature. A support vector machine-based algorithm was developed to identify disorder-related events using ACC and EDA features. Analyses were restricted to sleep periods to minimise confounding from voluntary movements. Results: Pretreatment recordings from two patients (P1 and P2) showed significantly elevated motor event frequency, ACC magnitude and EDA activity compared to controls. Post-treatment recordings demonstrated marked reductions in these metrics, consistent with patient-reported clinical improvement. Other patients showed variable results depending on treatment timing and signal quality. Conclusion: Our pilot study demonstrates the feasibility of using wearable technology for objective, real-world monitoring and assessment of patient status in anti-LGI1 AIE. Nocturnal monitoring offers a low-noise baseline for detecting seizure-related activity and may support earlier diagnosis, more accurate evaluation of treatment response and reduced reliance on resource-intensive inpatient evaluations. Future studies should expand monitoring to daytime periods and validate findings against conventional modalities such as video-EEG and electromyography polygraphy.
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.