ArticleEpilepsia open2026
Pulse-based photoplethysmography quality assessment improves wearable seizure detection performance.
Article in Epilepsia open, 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.
- Real-Time SpOSensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveWearable photoplethysmography (PPG) is increasingly used for seizure detection due to its ability to unobtrusively estimate heart rate (HR). However, the vulnerability of PPG to body movements often leads to unreliable HR estimates, compromising accurate seizure detection. Although this limitation is well recognized, methods for rejecting artifactual HR measures-and their impact on seizure detection performance-have not yet been studied.
methodsWe sourced data from the PROMISE trial, a home-based study in children with refractory epilepsy that evaluated the performance of the NightWatch (NW) in detecting nocturnal motor seizures. We applied a novel pulse-based quality assessment (PQA) method that evaluates the quality of each individual PPG pulse and excludes compromised ones prior to HR estimation. We compared the performance of PQA with two alternatives: HR-based quality assessment (HRQA), rejecting extreme outliers in consecutive inter-beat intervals, and no quality assessment (noQA). We assessed the impact of PQA, HRQA, and noQA on seizure detection performance by applying HR increase thresholds from 30% to 80% relative to the baseline. A permutation test with bootstrapping was applied for all statistical comparisons.
resultsWe analyzed 741 NW alarms, comprising 135 true seizures and 606 non-seizure events in 28 children (46% female; age: 9.1 ± 3.3 years). Averaged across all evaluated detection thresholds, both PQA and HRQA significantly improved seizure detection performance compared to noQA (p < 0.005). PQA led to mean increases of 0.248 in sensitivity, 0.025 in positive predictive value (PPV), and 0.082 in F1-score. HRQA showed mean increases of 0.081 in sensitivity, 0.040 in PPV, and 0.056 in F1-score. At clinically relevant sensitivity levels (0.8, 0.85, and 0.9), PQA showed a relative improvement over HRQA, with F1-scores increasing by 4%-15% and PPV by 5%-19%. SIGNIFICANCE: Implementing PPG quality assessment-particularly pulse-based-improves the performance of wearable HR-based seizure detection. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: This study aimed to improve seizure detection in wearable devices by introducing a new method for assessing the quality of the heart rate (HR) data derived from a light sensor called photoplethysmography (PPG). By applying our method to data from children with epilepsy, we showed that discarding low-quality PPG data before HR estimation leads to better seizure detection, allowing more seizures to be correctly identified. This improvement is important because it enhances seizure detection performance through a software-only upgrade.
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.