ArticleEpilepsia2026
Tonic-clonic seizures captured during ambulatory video-EEG are frequently unreported.
Article in Epilepsia, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Sounding the Alarm: Accuracy of Seizure Detection Devices.Epilepsy currents · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTonic-clonic seizures (TCSs) are widely regarded as clinically obvious, yet seizure counts used for treatment decisions and risk counseling often rely on patient or caregiver diaries. We sought to quantify the frequency of unreported TCSs during prolonged ambulatory video-EEG (vEEG) monitoring and examined associations with electrographic-onset subtype and patient characteristics.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of routinely collected ambulatory vEEG from a single national Australian service (January 2018-June 2024). Studies were eligible if the patient had epilepsy and at least one objectively captured TCSs. Reporting status was derived from diary entries and post-study questioning, and classified as reported vs unreported. The primary descriptive outcome was patient-level reporting status across captured TCSs: all captured TCSs reported, some captured TCSs reported, or no captured TCSs reported. Event-level reporting status was used for seizure-level descriptive summaries and patient-clustered analyses. Event-level associations were examined using patient-clustered generalized estimating equations, and patient-level subgroup comparisons used nonparametric and categorical tests.
resultsAmong 130 patients with objectively captured TCSs, 69 of 130 (53.1%) reported all captured TCSs, 41 of 130 (31.5%) reported some but not all captured TCSs, and 20 of 130 (15.4%) reported no TCSs during monitoring. Overall, 61 of 130 patients (46.9%) had at least one unreported TCS. At the event level, 340 of 754 captured TCSs (45.1%) were unreported and identified only on review. Nineteen of 130 patients (14.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 9.0-21.9) had no documented prior TCS history in available service records and reported no TCSs during monitoring. Unreported event proportions were similar across focal-onset and generalized-onset TCSs, whereas sleep was associated with higher odds of underreporting. SIGNIFICANCE: In this selected ambulatory vEEG cohort, nearly half of patients with captured TCSs had at least one unreported TCS, including 15.4% who reported none during monitoring. These findings indicate that diary-based histories may underestimate convulsive seizure burden in some monitored patients, with implications for safety decisions, therapeutic escalation, and sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) counseling.
Indexed as
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.