A Systematic Review of Machine Learning Methods for Multimodal EEG Data in Clinical Application
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) techniques have been widely applied to analyze electroencephalography (EEG) signals for disease diagnosis and brain-computer interfaces (BCI). The integration of multimodal data has been shown to enhance the accuracy of ML and DL models. Combining EEG with other modalities can improve clinical decision-making by addressing complex tasks in clinical populations. This systematic literature review explores the use of multimodal EEG data in ML and DL models for clinical applications. A comprehensive search was conducted across PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, yielding 16 relevant studies after three rounds of filtering. These studies demonstrate the application of multimodal EEG data in addressing clinical challenges, including neuropsychiatric disorders, neurological conditions (e.g., seizure detection), neurodevelopmental disorders (e.g., autism spectrum disorder), and sleep stage classification. Data fusion occurred at three levels: signal, feature, and decision levels. The most commonly used ML models were support vector machines (SVM) and decision trees. Notably, 11 out of the 16 studies reported improvements in model accuracy with multimodal EEG data. This review highlights the potential of multimodal EEG-based ML models in enhancing clinical diagnostics and problem-solving.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Systematic review | high |
| grok | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Systematic review | medium |
| opus | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Systematic review | low |
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 | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 3 models reading the full record.
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".