MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307023738 · doi:10.1088/1741-2552/ac9c93

Improving automated diagnosis of epilepsy from EEGs beyond IEDs

2022· article· en· W4307023738 on OpenAlexaff
Prasanth Thangavel, John Thomas, Nishant Sinha, Wei Yan Peh, Rajamanickam Yuvaraj, Sydney S. Cash, Rima Chaudhari, Sagar Karia, Jin Jing, Rahul Rathakrishnan, Vinay Saini, Nilesh Shah, Rohit Srivastava, Yee‐Leng Tan, Brandon Westover, Justin Dauwels

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neural Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeMinistry of Education, IndiaNational Health Insurance ServiceMinistry of Education - Singapore
KeywordsElectroencephalographyIctalEpilepsyComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePsychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objective. Clinical diagnosis of epilepsy relies partially on identifying interictal epileptiform discharges (IEDs) in scalp electroencephalograms (EEGs). This process is expert-biased, tedious, and can delay the diagnosis procedure. Beyond automatically detecting IEDs, there are far fewer studies on automated methods to differentiate epileptic EEGs (potentially without IEDs) from normal EEGs. In addition, the diagnosis of epilepsy based on a single EEG tends to be low. Consequently, there is a strong need for automated systems for EEG interpretation. Traditionally, epilepsy diagnosis relies heavily on IEDs. However, since not all epileptic EEGs exhibit IEDs, it is essential to explore IED-independent EEG measures for epilepsy diagnosis. The main objective is to develop an automated system for detecting epileptic EEGs, both with or without IEDs. In order to detect epileptic EEGs without IEDs, it is crucial to include EEG features in the algorithm that are not directly related to IEDs. Approach. In this study, we explore the background characteristics of interictal EEG for automated and more reliable diagnosis of epilepsy. Specifically, we investigate features based on univariate temporal measures (UTMs), spectral, wavelet, Stockwell, connectivity, and graph metrics of EEGs, besides patient-related information (age and vigilance state). The evaluation is performed on a sizeable cohort of routine scalp EEGs (685 epileptic EEGs and 1229 normal EEGs) from five centers across Singapore, USA, and India. Main results. In comparison with the current literature, we obtained an improved Leave-One-Subject-Out (LOSO) cross-validation (CV) area under the curve (AUC) of 0.871 (Balanced Accuracy (BAC) of 80.9%) with a combination of three features (IED rate, and Daubechies and Morlet wavelets) for the classification of EEGs with IEDs vs. normal EEGs. The IED-independent feature UTM achieved a LOSO CV AUC of 0.809 (BAC of 74.4%). The inclusion of IED-independent features also helps to improve the EEG-level classification of epileptic EEGs with and without IEDs vs. normal EEGs, achieving an AUC of 0.822 (BAC of 77.6%) compared to 0.688 (BAC of 59.6%) for classification only based on the IED rate. Specifically, the addition of IED-independent features improved the BAC by 21% in detecting epileptic EEGs that do not contain IEDs. Significance. These results pave the way towards automated detection of epilepsy. We are one of the first to analyze epileptic EEGs without IEDs, thereby opening up an underexplored option in epilepsy diagnosis.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.301
Threshold uncertainty score0.461

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations18
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neural EngineeringSame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207