MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3116974111 · doi:10.2196/25309

Remote and Long-Term Self-Monitoring of Electroencephalographic and Noninvasive Measurable Variables at Home in Patients With Epilepsy (EEG@HOME): Protocol for an Observational Study

2020· article· en· W3116974111 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Andrea Biondi, Petroula Laiou, Elisa Bruno, Pedro F. Viana, Martijn Schreuder, William L. Hart, Ewan S. Nurse, Deb K. Pal, Mark P. Richardson

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectroencephalographyObservational studyEpilepsyMedicineWearable computerPhysical medicine and rehabilitationAudiologyComputer sciencePsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Epileptic seizures are spontaneous events that severely affect the lives of patients due to their recurrence and unpredictability. The integration of new wearable and mobile technologies to collect electroencephalographic (EEG) and extracerebral signals in a portable system might be the solution to prospectively identify times of seizure occurrence or propensity. The performances of several seizure detection devices have been assessed by validated studies, and patient perspectives on wearables have been explored to better match their needs. Despite this, there is a major gap in the literature on long-term, real-life acceptability and performance of mobile technology essential to managing chronic disorders such as epilepsy. OBJECTIVE: EEG@HOME is an observational, nonrandomized, noninterventional study that aims to develop a new feasible procedure that allows people with epilepsy to independently, continuously, and safely acquire noninvasive variables at home. The data collected will be analyzed to develop a general model to predict periods of increased seizure risk. METHODS: A total of 12 adults with a diagnosis of pharmaco-resistant epilepsy and at least 20 seizures per year will be recruited at King's College Hospital, London. Participants will be asked to self-apply an easy and portable EEG recording system (ANT Neuro) to record scalp EEG at home twice daily. From each serial EEG recording, brain network ictogenicity (BNI), a new biomarker of the propensity of the brain to develop seizures, will be extracted. A noninvasive wrist-worn device (Fitbit Charge 3; Fitbit Inc) will be used to collect non-EEG biosignals (heart rate, sleep quality index, and steps), and a smartphone app (Seer app; Seer Medical) will be used to collect data related to seizure occurrence, medication taken, sleep quality, stress, and mood. All data will be collected continuously for 6 months. Standardized questionnaires (the Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire and System Usability Scale) will be completed to assess the acceptability and feasibility of the procedure. BNI, continuous wrist-worn sensor biosignals, and electronic survey data will be correlated with seizure occurrence as reported in the diary to investigate their potential values as biomarkers of seizure risk. RESULTS: The EEG@HOME project received funding from Epilepsy Research UK in 2018 and was approved by the Bromley Research Ethics Committee in March 2020. The first participants were enrolled in October 2020, and we expect to publish the first results by the end of 2022. CONCLUSIONS: With the EEG@HOME study, we aim to take advantage of new advances in remote monitoring technology, including self-applied EEG, to investigate the feasibility of long-term disease self-monitoring. Further, we hope our study will bring new insights into noninvasively collected personalized risk factors of seizure occurrence and seizure propensity that may help to mitigate one of the most difficult aspects of refractory epilepsy: the unpredictability of seizure occurrence. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/25309.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.159
Threshold uncertainty score0.720

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.320
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.151 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations29
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207