Cited by 54Epilepsy research and treatmentEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control

Twenty‐four‐hour patterns in electrodermal activity recordings of patients with and without epileptic seizures

Open access
Vieluf, Solveig, Amengual‐Gual, Marta, Zhang, Bo, El Atrache, Rima, Ufongene, Claire, Jackson, Michele C., Branch, Sarah, Reinsberger, Claus +1 more·2021·Epilepsia

Abstract

Objective: Daytime and nighttime patterns affect the dynamic modulation of brain and body functions and influence the autonomic nervous system response to seizures. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate 24‐hour patterns of electrodermal activity (EDA) in patients with and without seizures. Methods: We included pediatric patients with (a) seizures (SZ), including focal impaired awareness seizures (FIAS) or generalized tonic‐clonic seizures (GTCS), (b) no seizures and normal electroencephalography (NEEG), or (c) no seizures but epileptiform activity in the EEG (EA) during vEEG monitoring. Patients wore a device that continuously recorded EDA and temperature (TEMP). EDA levels, EDA spectral power, and TEMP levels were analyzed. To investigate 24‐hour patterns, we performed a nonlinear mixed‐effects model analysis. Relative mean pre‐ictal (−30 min to seizure onset) and post‐ictal (I: 30 min after seizure offset; II: 30 to 60 min after seizure offset) values were compared for SZ subgroups. Results: We included 119 patients (40 SZ, 17 NEEG, 62 EA). EDA level and power group‐specific models (SZ, NEEG, EA) (h = 1; P < .01) were superior to the all‐patient cohort model. Fifty‐nine seizures were analyzed. Pre‐ictal EDA values were lower than respective 24‐hour modulated SZ group values. Post hoc comparisons following the period‐by‐seizure type interaction (EDA level: = 18.50; P < .001, and power: = 6.73; P = .035) revealed that EDA levels were higher in the post‐ictal period I for FIAS and GTCS and in post‐ictal period II for GTCS only compared to the pre‐ictal period. Significance: Continuously monitored EDA shows a pattern of change over 24 hours. Curve amplitudes in patients with recorded seizures were lower as compared to patients who did not exhibit seizures during the recording period. Sympathetic skin responses were greater and more prolonged in GTCS compared to FIAS. EDA recordings from wearable devices offer a noninvasive tool to continuously monitor sympathetic activity with potential applications for seizure detection, prediction, and potentially sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) risk estimation.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/epi.16843

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Any longer-term data sets from wearable devices, especially if recorded in ambulatory settings, will contain periods where the device was recording, but not actually on the subject's body in the correct manner.

    “Any longer-term data sets from wearable devices, especially if recorded in ambulatory settings, will contain periods where the device was recording, but not actually on the subject’s body in the correct manner, as also noted in previous studies21,30.”

    From Data quality evaluation in wearable monitoring (2022) · cites this paper as [30]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vieluf, S., Amengual‐Gual, M., Zhang, B., El Atrache, R., Ufongene, C., Jackson, M. C., Branch, S., Reinsberger, C., & Loddenkemper, T.
Affiliations
  • Boston Children's Hospital (US)
  • Division of Epilepsy and Clinical Neurophysiology Department of Neurology Boston Children’s Hospital Harvard Medical School Boston MA USA
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
Vieluf, Solveig
Venue
Epilepsia
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2021-02-23
Volume
62
Issue
4
Pages
960-972
ISSN
  • 0013-9580 (ISSN-L)
  • 1528-1167
OpenAlex
W3131989205
Cited by
54
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 5
FWCI
6.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Epilepsia (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (VI 1088/1‐1)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Epilepsy research and treatment
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Keywords
electrodermal activity, seizure patterns, complex partial seizures, generalized tonic-clonic seizures, autonomic nervous system, sympathetic skin response, epileptiform activity, sudden unexpected death in epilepsy, seizure detection, wearable devices
MeSH terms
Wearable Electronic Devices, Adolescent, Child, Child, Preschool, Electroencephalography, Female, Galvanic Skin Response, Humans, Male, Prospective Studies, Seizures, Time Factors, Video Recording, Cohort Studies

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