ArticleSystematic reviews2026
Epileptiform patterns in electroencephalography and clinical myoclonic seizures predict unfavorable outcomes in patients after cardiac arrest: a meta-analysis protocol.
Article in Systematic reviews, 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo accurately predict neurological outcomes among survivors after cardiac arrest (CA), we aim to analyze the experimental data of epileptiform electroencephalography (EEG) in CA survivors to explore the value of predictors of epileptiform EEG. We also aim to refine the timeline of EEG examination, thus providing a foundation for the prediction of the neurological outcomes of CA survivors in clinical practice.
methodsThe PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases will be searched from 2010 to 2025 to identify relevant literature based on previously established search terms. We will include observational studies that reported epileptiform EEG patterns and neurological outcomes in comatose survivors of CA. Studies involving patients under 18 years of age or with a prior history of epilepsy will be excluded. Methodological quality was assessed using quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies 2 (QUADAS-2). The GRADE framework will be used to assess the quality of evidence of the included studies. Meta-analysis will be performed using Stata 18 software. DISCUSSION: EEG is widely used to predict neurological recovery after CA, yet the prognostic value of epileptiform patterns remains debated regarding its time dependency and optimal use in multimodal approaches. This meta-analysis will address these gaps by assessing how predictive accuracy varies across EEG recording time windows (≤ 24, 24-48, > 48 h) to define optimal timing, and by synthesizing data on multiple EEG markers to inform multimodal prognostication. Our findings aim to refine outcome prediction for CA survivors. SYSTEMIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO 2023 CRD42023468222. Available from https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php ? ID = CRD42023468222.
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.