ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2026
How Much Does the Reduced EEG Montage Matter for Seizure Detection?: A Large-Cohort Simulation Study.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 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
- Updated by
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Implantable sub-scalp EEG systems with a small number of channels have emerged as promising solutions for long-term seizure monitoring in patients with epilepsy. How seizure detection performance varies by montage configuration is unknown. Objective: To quantify how automated seizure detection performance differs between full and reduced montages, and how these differences vary by epilepsy characteristics. Design: Retrospective cross-sectional study. Setting: Single-center at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania Epilepsy Monitoring Unit (EMU). Participants: EEG data from 2281 consecutive EMU admissions between January 2017 and December 2024 were screened. Admissions with at least one annotated seizure and one interictal clip ≥20 minutes from any seizure were included. Exposure: Computational simulation of published sub-scalp device montages using standard 10-20 EEG channels. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was event-based F1 scores evaluated for three published seizure detectors-a one-class support vector machine (SVM), a convolutional neural network (SPaRCNet), and a long short-term memory autoregressive model (NDD)-across montages. Results: A total of 466 admissions from 436 patients (mean [SD] age, 39.0 [14.4] years; 54.4% female) met inclusion criteria, comprising 1683 seizures and 1527 interictal clips. SPaRCNet achieved the highest performance (mean [SD] F1, 0.61 [0.30]), followed by NDD (0.56 [0.28]) and SVM (0.39 [0.25]). Performance decreased by at most 0.09 with reduced montages, depending on detectors. Patient factors accounted for the largest proportion of performance variance (29.2%), followed by detector choice (10.3%). Montage effects were minimal (0.4%), despite variation in optimal montage across detectors. Reduced-montage performance correlated moderately to highly with full-montage performance (ρ=0.29-0.73), suggesting full-montage performance could help identify patients suitable for sub-scalp devices. Missed seizures were associated with lower amplitude and bandpowers than detected seizures, though they remained distinguishable from interictal data. Conclusions and Relevance: Automated seizure detection achieved comparable accuracy, with only modest reductions, under simulated reduced montages. Performance differences were driven primarily by detector- and patient-level factors rather than montage. These findings support the feasibility of accurately detecting seizures with published sub-scalp devices and highlight the need for improved algorithms to optimize performance.
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.