COVID-19-Induced Seizures: A Meta-Analysis of Case Series and Retrospective Cohorts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The adverse events and complications of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continue to challenge the medical profession despite the worldwide vaccination against the severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the causative agent of COVID-19. Other than typical respiratory manifestations, COVID-19 also presents a wide range of neurological manifestations. This article underlines the pooled incidence of COVID-19-induced seizures in patients with epilepsy and without epilepsy. Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocols, we conducted a bibliographical search, and an initial search revealed 1,375 articles. In total, 21 articles were included in the final analysis by following the inclusion criteria. A total of 11,526 patients from 21 published articles that met the predetermined search criteria were included. The median age of the patients was 61.9 years, of whom 51.5% were males. A total of 255 patients presented with seizures as the first manifestation of COVID-19 with a prevalence of 2.2% (95% confidence interval = 0.05-0.24, p < 0.01) (I2 = 97%), of which 71 patients had previously been diagnosed with epilepsy. Among patients with epilepsy, 49 patients had seizures as an initial presentation of SARA-CoV-2 with an incidence of 72% (0.54-0.85, p = 0.1) (I2 = 34). Although the incidence of COVID-19-induced seizures is not high compared to other neurological manifestations, seizure incidence in epileptic patients with COVID-19 is remarkably high. New-onset seizures in any patient should be considered a presentation of COVID-19 in the absence of other causative factors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".