ReviewFrontiers in neurology
From prehospital care to the emergency department: current status and future directions of rapid EEG and artificial intelligence in the early recognition of status epilepticus.
Review in Frontiers in neurology. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Status epilepticus (SE) represents a time-sensitive, life-threatening neurological emergency. Among its major subtypes, nonconvulsive status epilepticus (NCSE) poses particular diagnostic challenges due to subtle and highly heterogeneous clinical manifestations, frequently resulting in treatment delays and increased risk of adverse outcomes. While conventional electroencephalography (EEG) remains the diagnostic gold standard, timely access to interpretable EEG recordings in emergency department and prehospital settings is often constrained by limited availability of equipment, trained technologists, and neurophysiology expertise. Rapid EEG systems-typically using reduced electrode montages and streamlined application-have emerged to shorten the interval between clinical suspicion and acquisition of actionable EEG data, including point-of-care EEG (POC-EEG). Concurrently, artificial intelligence (AI) has been integrated into EEG analysis platforms to automate detection of epileptiform discharges and quantify seizure burden, thereby mitigating resource constraints associated with real-time interpretation. This narrative review synthesizes technological advances, clinical evidence, and key challenges related to rapid EEG and AI for early recognition of SE/NCSE. Importantly, rapid EEG-whether used alone or with AI-assisted analysis-is designed to augment and support clinical decision-making rather than supplant human expertise. Despite its considerable potential, broad clinical implementation faces challenges related to technical reliability, clinical validation, and ethical concerns.
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.