ReviewCureus2026
EEG-Based Seizure Prediction Approaches Within Clinically Relevant Pre-seizure Windows Using Scalp EEG Datasets: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This systematic review synthesized evidence on EEG-based seizure prediction within clinically relevant pre-seizure windows, focusing on deep learning and machine learning models evaluated on public datasets. The review aimed to summarize predictive performance, including sensitivity, receiver operating characteristic curve findings when reported, and false-alarm outcomes for scalp EEG seizure prediction systems. It also examined methodological heterogeneity across studies, including the preictal window, defined as the period before seizure onset used for prediction; the seizure prediction horizon, defined as the minimum warning interval before seizure onset; and the seizure occurrence period, defined as the interval during which a seizure is expected after an alarm. Additional objectives were to compare validation strategies, including patient-wise generalization, and to identify design features most consistently associated with clinically actionable performance. The included evidence showed substantial variability in reported performance. It was limited by heterogeneous study designs, frequent reliance on patient-specific internal validation, limited external validation, inconsistent reporting of false alarms, and high or unclear risk of bias. Although scalp EEG seizure prediction models have shown potential to achieve moderate-to-high sensitivity in selected settings, confidence in their real-world generalizability remains limited. Overall, the findings suggest that clinical translation will require more standardized prediction windows, clearer reporting of alarm burdens, stronger validation frameworks, and prospective evaluations under real-world conditions.
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.