Literature DB >> 20087204

Effect of detection parameters on automated electroencephalography spike detection sensitivity and false-positive rate.

Lawrence Ver Hoef1, Rotem Elgavish, Robert C Knowlton.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Most seizure monitoring units use the Gotman algorithm or a variation on it for EEG spike detection, but the effect of various detection parameters on its accuracy has not been well established. The authors report sensitivities and false-positive rates for several different sets of detection parameters.
METHODS: Nine patients were studied. For each patient, 6 hours of EEG data were analyzed using five different sets of spike detection parameters including combinations of amplitude thresholds, state-dependent spike detection and advanced artifact rejection. Automated spike detections were compared with spikes found on visual EEG review.
RESULTS: Mean spike detection sensitivities for the different parameter sets ranged from 0.09 to 0.34. The highest sensitivity occurred with an amplitude threshold of 4, state-dependent spike detection turned on and advanced artifact rejection turned off. Mean rates of false-positives ranged from 4.2 to 48.6 per hour. The highest false-positive rate occurred with the same set of detection parameters that produced the highest sensitivity.
CONCLUSIONS: The sensitivity of spike detection with the Gotman algorithm is relatively low. The data favor using a lower amplitude threshold and not using advanced artifact rejection. The false-positive rate increases with improved sensitivity, but it is still within an acceptable range for clinical application.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20087204     DOI: 10.1097/WNP.0b013e3181cb4294

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Neurophysiol        ISSN: 0736-0258            Impact factor:   2.177


  6 in total

1.  Interictal epileptiform discharge characteristics underlying expert interrater agreement.

Authors:  Elham Bagheri; Justin Dauwels; Brian C Dean; Chad G Waters; M Brandon Westover; Jonathan J Halford
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2017-07-18       Impact factor: 3.708

2.  Unsupervised Learning of Spatiotemporal Interictal Discharges in Focal Epilepsy.

Authors:  Maxime O Baud; Jonathan K Kleen; Gopala K Anumanchipalli; Liberty S Hamilton; Yee-Leng Tan; Robert Knowlton; Edward F Chang
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2018-10-01       Impact factor: 4.654

3.  A fast machine learning approach to facilitate the detection of interictal epileptiform discharges in the scalp electroencephalogram.

Authors:  Elham Bagheri; Jing Jin; Justin Dauwels; Sydney Cash; M Brandon Westover
Journal:  J Neurosci Methods       Date:  2019-07-13       Impact factor: 2.390

4.  Modeling electroencephalography waveforms with semi-supervised deep belief nets: fast classification and anomaly measurement.

Authors:  D F Wulsin; J R Gupta; R Mani; J A Blanco; B Litt
Journal:  J Neural Eng       Date:  2011-04-28       Impact factor: 5.379

5.  Characteristics of EEG Interpreters Associated With Higher Interrater Agreement.

Authors:  Jonathan J Halford; Amir Arain; Giridhar P Kalamangalam; Suzette M LaRoche; Bonilha Leonardo; Maysaa Basha; Nabil J Azar; Ekrem Kutluay; Gabriel U Martz; Wolf J Bethany; Chad G Waters; Brian C Dean
Journal:  J Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 2.177

6.  CLASSIFIER CASCADE TO AID IN DETECTION OF EPILEPTIFORM TRANSIENTS IN INTERICTAL EEG.

Authors:  Elham Bagheri; Jing Jin; Justin Dauwels; Sydney Cash; M Brandon Westover
Journal:  Proc IEEE Int Conf Acoust Speech Signal Process       Date:  2018-09-13
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.