ArticleEpilepsia2026
Feasibility and signal quality of the Minder® implantable continuous EEG monitoring® system compared to 10-20 scalp electrodes over extended monitoring periods.
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
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the signal quality of the Minder implantable continuous EEG monitoring (iCEM) system compared to traditional scalp EEG in the context of long-term, continuous monitoring in individuals with epilepsy.
methodsTwenty-six patients implanted with the Minder iCEM system (November 2019 to July 2023) underwent 7-day video-EEG co-monitoring with full montage scalp EEG at 4 and 24 weeks post-implantation. Co-monitored EEG segments were rated for clarity on a 5-point ordinal scale by blinded expert reviewers for ictal and interictal periods. Minder vs scalp ratings were compared using Wilcoxon signed-rank test; 4- vs 24-week comparisons used Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Objective quantitative EEG analysis of the signal bandwidth was performed by application of spectral coherence analysis and Pearson's correlation coefficients.
resultsNo significant difference was found between interictal signal clarity reviewer ratings for Minder vs scalp EEG (p = .97), and there was no statistically significant difference between the Minder signal clarity ratings at 4 vs 24 weeks (p = .95). Pearson's correlation between Minder vs scalp EEG also indicated a high degree of similarity (median correlation = .69) and no statistically significant difference between correlations at 4 vs 24 weeks (p = .99). All electrographic seizures identified on full 10-20 scalp EEG were also identified on Minder; however, the full 10-20 montage received statistically higher seizure clarity ratings than Minder (p < .001). SIGNIFICANCE: This study supports the feasibility of sub-scalp EEG as a reliable long-term monitoring tool. Interictal signal quality was statistically equivalent to limited-montage scalp EEG, and all seizures identified on full 10-20 scalp EEG were also visualized on Minder. The full 10-20 montage did receive statistically higher seizure clarity ratings, reflecting its greater spatial resolution. The signal quality was stable through 24 weeks, demonstrating the fidelity of the device. These findings position the Minder system as a complement to full montage scalp EEG, particularly in ambulatory settings where continuous long-term recording is required.
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.