Computational Decision Support in Epilepsy Using Retrospective EEG
NCT ID: NCT05384782
Last Updated: 2022-05-20
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
825 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2019-12-01
2022-03-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
The secondary aim is to examine whether the computational biomarkers could contribute to reducing the waiting time and the number of clinical appointments needed before a final diagnosis is made.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Subcutaneous EEG: Forecasting of Epileptic Seizures
NCT04061707
A Prospective Diagnostic Belief Updating Study to verIfy the Utility of BioEP in First Seizure Clinics.
NCT05764252
A Retrospective Study to Validate BioEP as an Assessment Aid for Seizure Susceptibility
NCT06669364
A Study of Detection of Paroxysmal Events Utilizing Computer Vision and Machine Learning
NCT04738552
Prospective Evaluation of Probabilistic Predictions of Epileptic Seizure Risk Using the EPIDAY Tool
NCT07068919
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
By combining mathematical and computational techniques, we have identified properties in the resting-state EEG (eyes closed, relaxed) of people with epilepsy that differ from those of controls as well as their first-degree relatives (Chowdhury et al., 2014). Developing these approaches and applying them to routine recordings from individuals with epilepsy against a control cohort (Schmidt et al., 2016) revealed levels of diagnostic accuracy similar to current general (i.e. non-specialist) neurology practices (60% sensitivity, 87% specificity, N=68). Crucially, our method correctly classified several subjects using their first EEG, whereas clinical diagnosis was confirmed only after prolonged telemetric recordings over many months.
Since our methods and analysis depend on short segments of resting-state EEG only, its accuracy and efficacy do not rely on capturing epileptiform abnormalities, in contrast to the current use of EEG in diagnosing epilepsy. Since many EEGs return negative, clinicians are often faced with the problem of deciding on whether to opt for longer recordings of EEG or ambulatory or video EEG, which is currently the final method in the diagnostic cascade. This is time-consuming, expensive and relies on the availability and expertise of trained EEG-readers. By optimally interrogating short segments of background activity with mathematical and computational analysis, our methods, in the short term, provide additional evidence that could guide clinicians in future diagnostic steps.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
COHORT
RETROSPECTIVE
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
For each subject identified we would like to have all the available EEG files within the centre, with the following metadata:
Primary meta-data (crucial):
Age at the subject at time of each available EEG Treatment status at the time of each available EEG (including drug-load) Gender of the individual Ethnicity of the individual Confirmed diagnosis: details on the exact diagnosis made (syndrome and or condition)
Secondary meta-data (optional):
Aim of each available EEG at the time Information on whether any other conditions are present such as Alzheimer's disease, schizophrenia, Intellectual Disability If available: information on when the diagnosis was made If available: interpretation of each available EEG
Specifics for the EEG recordings:
Montage (10-20 preferred) Number of channels (minimum 19 channels) Referencing method (common average preferred) Format of the file (EDF preferred) Consistent channel labels for all EEGs provided from each centre Information concerning the time of day during the recording Information on the sampling frequency Faulty channels (not more than 2 preferred, all should be indicated though) Pre-processing details (information as to whether any filters were used, for example)
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Neuronostics Ltd
INDUSTRY
Cornwall Partnership NHS Foundation Trust
NETWORK
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Cornwall Partnership NHS Foundation Trust
Bodmin, Cornwall, United Kingdom
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Provided Documents
Download supplemental materials such as informed consent forms, study protocols, or participant manuals.
Document Type: Study Protocol
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
260729
Identifier Type: OTHER
Identifier Source: secondary_id
Version 10
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.