Elsevier

Clinical Neurophysiology

Volume 133, January 2022, Pages 68-70
Clinical Neurophysiology

Letter to the Editor
One EEG, one read – A manifesto towards reducing interrater variability among experts

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2021.10.007Get rights and content

Section snippets

Disclosures

Dr. Westover is co-founder of Beacon Biosignals, which played no role in this work. The other authors report no disclosures relevant to this manuscript. This work was not funded.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgements

We thank Dr. Daniel Kahneman and Dr. Olivier Sibony for invaluable discussions about level noise and pattern noise.

References (5)

  • U. Amin et al.

    The role of EEG in the erroneous diagnosis of epilepsy

    J Clin Neurophysiol

    (2019)
  • R.S. Fisher et al.

    ILAE official report: a practical clinical definition of epilepsy

    Epilepsia

    (2014)
There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (10)

  • A quantitative approach to evaluating interictal epileptiform discharges based on interpretable quantitative criteria

    2023, Clinical Neurophysiology
    Citation Excerpt :

    Human readers applying the six IFCN operational criteria to identify IEDs (Kane et al., 2017) were able to achieve diagnostic performance similar to conventional expert scoring (i.e., scoring without explicit reference to IFCN criteria) in a recent clinical validation study (Kural et al., 2020a). One of the main advantages associated with adoption of IFCN criteria relates to the decomposition of the complex implicit judgement involved in IED identification into a series of simpler tasks (Nascimento et al., 2022). Despite its success in standardizing the approach to identify IEDs, utilizing the IFCN criteria still requires subjective judgement.

  • EEG reading with or without clinical information – a real-world practice study

    2022, Neurophysiologie Clinique
    Citation Excerpt :

    Perception bias refers to bias in identification of EEG findings – especially those that are subtle (e.g., “looking too hard” in cases where history suggests epilepsy [1]). Interpretation bias refers to bias in classifying findings as normal or abnormal (i.e., under- or over-calling), a problem that is pronounced in EEG reading by experts even when clinical information is not provided [4]. History bias in EEG reading has been documented in a study where electroencephalographers changed their interpretation between normal and abnormal depending on whether clinical information was available [7].

View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text