ArticleBMC biomedical engineering2026
Comparative analysis of processed EEG indices and entropy-based metrics for assessing anesthetic depth: a scoping review - PRISMA-ScR.
Article in BMC biomedical engineering, 2026. 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.
- Comparison of the Cortical Activity Index and Bispectral Index During General Anesthesia: A Prospective Observational Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundProcessed electroencephalography (EEG) monitors such as the bispectral index (BIS) and patient state index (PSI), are used clinically to estimate anesthetic depth, yet their algorithmic design obscures how closely these indices reflect underlying neural complexity. Entropy-based analyses, grounded in information theory, provide a quantitative framework for characterizing EEG signal irregularity and have been proposed as physiologically interpretable alternatives. However, the relationship between these commercial indices and theoretical entropy measures remains unclear.
objectivesThis systematic review aimed to (1) synthesize existing evidence on the relationship between commercially available processed EEG metrics and entropy-based EEG analyses, and (2) identify factors influencing their comparability, including algorithmic, demographic, and anesthetic variables.
methodsA comprehensive literature search identified experimental and clinical studies comparing BIS, PSI, and related commercial indices with theoretical entropy measures (e.g., approximate entropy, sample entropy, and permutation entropy, state entropy and response entropy) across various anesthetic agents and clinical populations. Data were extracted on study design, patient demographics, EEG metrics, analytical methods, and reported correlations or prediction probabilities.
resultsNinety-four studies were included, encompassing participants across diverse anesthetic modalities. Overall, BIS exhibited moderate-to-strong correlations with entropy-derived measures and comparable prediction probabilities for distinguishing anesthetic depth. Entropy indices demonstrated greater resistance to certain artifacts but higher susceptibility to electromyographic contamination. Age, anesthetic type, and the use of neuromuscular blocking agents significantly influenced the relationship between indices. Across studies, heterogeneity in preprocessing, entropy algorithms, and patient selection limited direct comparability.
conclusionsCommercially processed EEG indices and theoretical entropy measures capture overlapping but distinct dimensions of cortical dynamics during anesthesia. While both reliably track transitions in consciousness, discrepancies arise from differences in signal filtering, algorithm design, and physiological variability. Future research should prioritize transparent algorithmic frameworks and standardized entropy computation to enhance the interpretability and cross-device comparability of EEG-derived anesthesia monitors.
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.