Trial reportEuropean journal of neurology2026
Continuous Versus Routine EEG in Critically Ill Patients Without Primary Neurologic Condition: Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in European journal of neurology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionContinuous EEG (cEEG) is increasingly used in critically ill patients, driven by its superior seizure detection sensitivity over routine EEG (rEEG). However, cEEG is resource-demanding, and whether its use translates into improved clinical outcomes in patients without primary neurologic conditions remains unknown.
methodsThis is a post hoc analysis of the multicenter randomized CERTA trial, in which critically-ill adults were randomized 1:1 to cEEG or two rEEG recordings. Six-month mortality represented the primary outcome, while exploratory outcomes included functional outcome (Cerebral Performance Categories, CPC), detection of seizures/status epilepticus, ictal-interictal continuum features, medication changes, and infections within 4 weeks. Analysis was restricted to patients without primary neurologic injury.
resultsAmong 364 enrolled patients, 76 lacked a primary neurologic condition (cEEG: n = 34, rEEG: n = 42). Continuous EEG was not associated with mortality (p = 0.970) or functional outcome (CPC 1-2; p = 0.893). No seizures or status epilepticus were detected in either group. Rates of EEG periodic patterns, ictal-interictal continuum features, medication changes, and infections were comparable between groups.
conclusionIn critically ill adults without a primary neurologic condition, cEEG was not associated with measurable benefits in survival, neurological recovery, or epileptiform activity detection compared with repeated rEEG, in a cohort without detected electrographic seizures or status epilepticus. Pending larger, ideally prospective comparative studies, repeated routine EEG may represent a reasonable alternative in resource-limited settings.
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.