Tag: EEG

New Tech could Cut Epilepsy Misdiagnoses by up to 70% Using Routine EEGs

Source: Pixabay

Doctors could soon reduce epilepsy misdiagnoses by up to 70% using a new tool that turns routine electroencephalogram, or EEG, tests that appear normal into highly accurate epilepsy predictors, a Johns Hopkins University study has found.

By uncovering hidden epilepsy signatures in seemingly normal EEGs, the tool could significantly reduce false positives, seen in around 30% of cases globally, and spare patients from medication side effects, driving restrictions, and other quality-of-life challenges linked to misdiagnoses.

“Even when EEGs appear completely normal, our tool provides insights that make them actionable,” said Sridevi V. Sarma, a Johns Hopkins biomedical engineering professor who led the work. “We can get to the right diagnosis three times faster because patients often need multiple EEGs before abnormalities are detected, even if they have epilepsy. Accurate early diagnosis means a quicker path to effective treatment.”

A report of the study is newly published in Annals of Neurology.

Epilepsy causes recurrent, unprovoked seizures triggered by bursts of abnormal electrical activity in the brain. Standard care involves scalp EEG recordings during initial evaluations. These tests track brainwave patterns using small electrodes placed on the scalp.

Clinicians partly rely on EEGs to diagnose epilepsy and decide whether patients need anti-seizure medications. However, EEGs can be challenging to interpret because they capture noisy signals and because seizures rarely occur during the typical 20 to 40 minutes of an EEG recording. These characteristics makes diagnosing epilepsy subjective and prone to error, even for specialists, Sarma explained.

To improve reliability, Sarma’s team studied what happens in the brains of patients when they are not experiencing seizures. Their tool, called EpiScalp, uses algorithms trained on dynamic network models to map brainwave patterns and identify hidden signs of epilepsy from a single routine EEG.

“If you have epilepsy, why don’t you have seizures all the time? We hypothesized that some brain regions act as natural inhibitors, suppressing seizures. It’s like the brain’s immune response to the disease,” Sarma said.

The new study analyzed 198 epilepsy patients from five major medical centers: Johns Hopkins Hospital, Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, University of Maryland Medical Center, and Thomas Jefferson University Hospital. Out of these 198 patients in the study, 91 patients had epilepsy while the rest had non-epileptic conditions mimicking epilepsy.

When Sarma’s team reanalysed the initial EEGs using EpiScalp, the tool ruled out 96% of those false positives, cutting potential misdiagnoses among these cases from 54% to 17%.

“This is where our tool makes a difference because it can help us uncover markers of epilepsy in EEGs that appear uninformative, reducing the risk of patients being misdiagnosed and treated for a condition they don’t have,” said Khalil Husari, co-senior author and assistant professor of neurology at Johns Hopkins. “These patients experienced side effects of the anti-seizure medication without any benefit because they didn’t have epilepsy. Without the correct diagnosis, we can’t find out what’s actually causing their symptoms.”

In certain cases, misdiagnosis happens due to misinterpretation of EEGs, Husari explained, as doctors may overdiagnose epilepsy to prevent the dangers of a second seizure. But in some cases, patients experience nonepileptic seizures, which mimic epilepsy. These conditions can often be treated with therapies that do not involve epilepsy medication.

In earlier work, the team studied epileptic brain networks using intracranial EEGs to demonstrate that the seizure onset zone is being inhibited by neighboring regions in the brain when patients are not seizing. EpiScalp builds on this research, identifying these patterns from routine scalp EEGs.

Traditional approaches to improve EEG interpretation often focus on individual signals or electrodes. Instead, EpiScalp analyses how different regions of the brain interact and influence one another through a complex network of neural pathways, said Patrick Myers, first author and doctoral student in biomedical engineering at Johns Hopkins.

“If you just look at how nodes are interacting with each other within the brain network, you can find this pattern of independent nodes trying to cause a lot of activity and the suppression from nodes in a second region, and they’re not interacting with the rest of the brain,” Myers said. “We check whether we can see this pattern anywhere. Do we see a region in your EEG that has been decoupled from the rest of the brain’s network? A healthy person shouldn’t have that.”

Source: Johns Hopkins University

Looking Ahead after 100 Years of EEG: Experts’ Predictions

Cognionics, founded by bioengineering alumnus Mike Yu Chi, has developed a wearable EEG headset that’s comparable to state of the art laboratory equipment. Credit: UC San Diego

Since the first recording in July 1924, human electroencephalography (EEG) has been integral to our understanding of brain function and dysfunction: most significantly in the clinical diagnosis of epilepsy, where the analysis of the EEG signal meant that a condition previously seen as a personality disorder was quickly redefined as a disorder of brain activity. 

Now, a century on, more than 500 experts from around the globe have been asked to reflect on the impact of this groundbreaking methodology, as well as on the challenges and priorities for the future. 

A survey led by University of Leeds academics, saw respondents – with 6685 years of collective experience – presented with possible future developments for EEG, ranging from those deemed ‘critical to progress’ to the ‘highly improbable,’ and asked to estimate how long it might be before they were achieved. The results are published in the journal Nature Human Behaviour.   

Futuristic innovations 

The list features an array of fascinating, futuristic innovations that experts believe could be achieved within a generation. This includes using EEG to enhance cognitive performance; early detection of learning disabilities; widespread use as a lie detector; and use as a primary communication tool for those with severe motor disabilities and locked-in syndrome. 

Real-time, reliable diagnosis of brain abnormalities such as seizures or tumours is believed to be just 10-14 years away, while the probability of reading the content of dreams and long-term memories is judged to be more than 50 years away by some experts, but dismissed by many as closer to science fiction than reality.  

It may be surprising to many that, according to the survey, within a generation we could all be carrying around our own, personal, portable EEG. 

The paper’s co-author Dominik Welke, Research Fellow in Leeds’ School of Psychology, said: “They could really become something like a smartphone: where almost everybody has access to them and can use them daily – ideally improving their life by providing meaningful insight into physiological factors.” 

He added: “One such positive, potential future use of EEG technology could be vigilance control for drivers or pilots. These work-safety systems could assist the user in identifying if they were falling asleep, then wake them up or tell the co-pilot they need to take over.” 

They could really become something like a smartphone: where almost everybody has access to them and can use them daily

Dominik Welke, Research Fellow at the University

The hardware involved in recording EEG is relatively basic, remaining unchanged – in principle – since it was first used by psychiatrist Hans Berger in Germany on July 6, 1924. What has drastically changed since then is the analysis of – and what we can do with – the now digitally-recorded data. 

Consisting of just electrodes and an amplifier, EEG systems are becoming increasingly cheap to produce, as well as more portable and user-friendly. Coupled with its non-invasive nature, there is little to prevent it from becoming more accessible to a wider audience.  

Reducing health inequalities 

While the prospect of EEG technology being widely used in gaming and VR – predicted to be only around 20 years away – will thrill gamers, the truly exciting possibility for scientists and clinicians is that this increasing accessibility will allow them to engage with communities traditionally excluded from EEG research, crucially, in low-income countries that cannot afford more complex imaging technology. 

Advances in AI-driven automation are also expected to improve and speed up analysis of complicated data.  

Dr Welke said: “Looking ahead to the future: from the hardware side, it’s comparatively cheap and easy to produce, and from the analysis and software side, with these new computing technologies, all the puzzle pieces are there to really roll out EEG to a very large user base. 

“As opposed to other methods out there – such as MRI, or implanted devices – EEG has the potential to make neuroimaging available to all the people in the world.”  

I think that EEG, when combined with technologies such as AI and virtual reality, could radically transform the ways in which we interact with machines, and in doing so, play an extremely important role in science and society over the next 100 years

Faisal Mushtaq, Professor of Cognitive Science and the Director of the Centre for Immersive Technologies at the University

The paper’s lead author, Faisal Mushtaq, Professor of Cognitive Science and the Director of the Centre for Immersive Technologies at the University, said: “Nearly all the data we currently have on the human brain comes from a very small segment of the world’s population. There is a growing recognition that this is hampering our ability to generalise findings and improve global brain health.

“EEG stands out as the most cost-effective and logistically feasible neuroimaging tool for worldwide use across diverse settings. This would help build a neuroscience that is inclusive and representative of the global population.  

He added: “Our partners at the Global Brain Consortium are laying the foundations for increasing reach in this way and I expect this will unlock new opportunities for groundbreaking discoveries on the mechanisms of brain function.” 

Ethical questions 

Alongside the optimism that emerging technologies are opening exciting new possibilities for EEG, the experts consulted also sounded a note of caution, with concerns that ranged from a lack of adherence to agreed standards and protocols to ethical questions created by novel commercial applications and the lure of ‘neuroenhancement’. 

Dr Welke said: “I’m sure some of the multi-national tech companies might be very interested in rolling out EEG or other neuroimaging technology, just to get more information on their users that hints at their preferences and emotions 24 hours a day. But should it be used in this way?  

“There are obvious concerns around cognitive freedom and mental privacy. This feeds back into the importance of ‘responsibility’ – the fact that new ways of using a technology are also likely to raise new ethical questions.” 

Another objective of the survey was to identify the priorities of the EEG community for guiding future efforts. Participants rated how important major developments and advancements in various domains of EEG research would be to their work. 

Professor Mushtaq said: “I think that EEG, when combined with technologies such as AI and virtual reality, could radically transform the ways in which we interact with machines, and in doing so, play an extremely important role in science and society over the next 100 years.

“But to ensure this, the neuroscience community—from academic, clinical and industry settings—must commit to promoting robust, ethical, inclusive, and sustainable practices that will help realise its enormous potential.” 

The work was conducted by more than 90 authors, ranging from early career researchers to eminent figures in the field, collectively known as the EEG100 consortium.  

It started out as a partnership between #EEGManyLabs – an international network of researchers from more than 30 countries assessing the replicability of the results of some of the most important and influential EEG experiments of psychological phenomena – and the Global Brain Consortium, a diverse network of brain researchers, clinicians and institutions committed to achieving improved and more equitable health outcomes worldwide. 

The paper’s last author, Pedro Antonio Valdés-Sosa, Director of China Cuba Laboratory for Neurotechnology at the University of Electronic Science and Technology of China/Cuban Neuroscience Center, said: “In several countries, including Cuba, we have demonstrated that EEG can mass-screen some nervous system disorders at a population level. This technology is especially appropriate when resources are limited, as they are in disengaged groups worldwide.

“There are hurdles to overcome to employ EEG at a global scale, but by doing so, we can hopefully improve millions more lives.” 

Dr Sadhana Sharma, Head of Bioscience for Health Strategy at the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) – which funded the paper’s lead authors – said: “EEG technology has the potential to transform our day-to-day activities and how we diagnose and treat neurological conditions in the future, ensuring that insights into brain health are accessible to diverse populations worldwide.

“As we embrace developments in bioscience, our focus remains on fostering interdisciplinary collaborations that drive ethical, equitable and impactful advancements in brain science on a global scale.” 

Source: University of Leeds

The Brain Unconsciously Excels at Spotting Deepfakes

Photo by Cottonbro on Pexels

When looking at real and ‘deepfake’ faces created by AI, observers can’t consciously recognise the difference – but their brains can, according to new research which appears in Vision Research.

Convincing fakes made by computers, deepfake videos, images, audio, or text are rife in the spread of disinformation, fraud and counterfeiting.

For example, in 2016, a Russian troll farm deployed over 50 000 bots on Twitter, making use of deepfakes as profile pictures, to try to influence the outcome of the US presidential election, which according to some research may have boosted Donald Trump’s votes by 3%. More recently, a deepfake video of Volodymyr Zelensky urging his troops to surrender to Russian forces surfaced on social media, muddying people’s understanding of the war in Ukraine with potential, high-stakes implications.

Fortunately, neuroscientists have discovered a new way to spot these insidious fakes: people’s brains are able to detect AI-generated fake faces, even though people could not distinguish between real and fake faces.

When looking at participants’ brain activity, the University of Sydney researchers found deepfakes could be identified 54% of the time. However, when participants were asked to verbally identify the deepfakes, they could only do this 37% of the time.

“Although the brain accuracy rate in this study is low – 54 percent – it is statistically reliable,” said senior researcher Associate Professor Thomas Carlson.

“That tells us the brain can spot the difference between deepfakes and authentic images.”

Spotting bots and scams

The researchers say their findings may be a starting-off point in the battle against deepfakes.

“The fact that the brain can detect deepfakes means current deepfakes are flawed,” Associate Professor Carlson said. “If we can learn how the brain spots deepfakes, we could use this information to create algorithms to flag potential deepfakes on digital platforms like Facebook and Twitter.”

They project that in the more distant future that technology, based on their and similar studies, could developed to alert people to deepfake scams in real time. Security personnel for example might wear EEG-enabled helmets to alert them of a deepfake.

Associate Professor Carlson said: “EEG-enabled helmets could have been helpful in preventing recent bank heist and corporate fraud cases in Dubai and the UK, where scammers used cloned voice technology to steal tens of millions of dollars. In these cases, finance personnel thought they heard the voice of a trusted client or associate and were duped into transferring funds.”

Method: eyes versus brain

The researchers conducted two experiments, one behavioural and one using neuroimaging. In the behavioural experiment, participants were shown 50 images of real and computer-generated fake faces and were asked to identify which were real and which were fake.

Then, a different group of participants were shown the same images while their brain activity was recorded using EEG, without knowing that half the images were fakes.

The researchers then compared the results of the two experiments, finding people’s brains were better at detecting deepfakes than their eyes.

A starting point

The researchers stress that the novelty of their study makes it merely a starting point. It won’t immediately – or even ever – lead to a foolproof way of detecting deepfakes.

Associate Professor Carlson said: “More research must be done. What gives us hope is that deepfakes are created by computer programs, and these programs leave ‘fingerprints’ that can be detected.

“Our finding about the brain’s deepfake-spotting power means we might have another tool to fight back against deepfakes and the spread of disinformation.”

Source: The University of Sydney