Cited by 403Epilepsy research and treatmentEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesSeismology and Earthquake Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 107 of the 107 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Diagnostic challenges in epilepsy: seizure under-reporting and seizure detection

Elger, Christian E, Hoppe, Christian·2018·The Lancet Neurology

Abstract

Epileptic seizures vary greatly in clinical phenomenology and can markedly affect the patient's quality of life. As therapeutic interventions focus on reduction or elimination of seizures, the accurate documentation of seizure occurrence is essential. However, patient self-evaluation compared with objective evaluation by video-electroencephalography (EEG) monitoring or long-term ambulatory EEG revealed that patients document fewer than 50% of their seizures, on average, and that documentation accuracy varies significantly over time. For good clinical practice in epilepsy, novel and feasible seizure detection techniques for ambulatory long-term use are needed. Generalised tonic-clonic seizures can already be detected reliably by methods that rely on motion recording (eg, surface electromyography). However, the automatic detection of other seizure types, such as complex partial seizures, will require multimodal approaches that combine the measurement of ictal autonomic alterations (eg, heart rate) and of characteristic movement patterns (eg, accelerometry). Innovative and feasible tools for automatic seizure detection are likely to advance both monitoring of the outcome of a treatment in a patient and clinical research in epilepsy.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s1474-4422(18)30038-3

Cites

107 of 107 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 403

Metadata

Authors
Elger, C. E., & Hoppe, C.
Affiliations
University of Bonn (DE)
Corresponding author
Hoppe, Christian
Venue
The Lancet Neurology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-03
Volume
17
Issue
3
Pages
279-288
ISSN
1474-4422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2787779804
Cited by
403
References
107
Citations by year
2026: 39 · 2025: 57 · 2024: 76 · 2023: 53 · 2022: 56 · 2021: 45 · 2020: 41 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 10
FWCI
4.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Lancet Neurology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Clinical Neurology › Epilepsy research and treatment
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Seismology and Earthquake Studies
Keywords
epilepsy, seizure detection, video-EEG monitoring, ambulatory EEG, generalized tonic-clonic seizures, complex partial seizures, surface electromyography, accelerometry, heart rate, automated seizure detection, treatment outcome monitoring
MeSH terms
Electroencephalography, Epilepsy, Humans, Monitoring, Physiologic, Movement

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review