Back

Updating Beliefs using New Evidence from a Diagnostic Decision-Support Aid in a Nurse-Led First-Seizure Clinic

Tittensor, P.; Batterham, A. M.; Rowe, J.-D.; Russell, D.; Steward, D.; Schnabel, E.; Meiklejohn, K.; Mainstone, M.; Wellburn, S.; Terry, J. R.; Woldman, W.

2024-12-16 neurology
10.1101/2024.12.13.24318654 medRxiv
Show abstract

Recent studies using computational and mathematical interrogation of background EEG have revealed eight biomarkers that inform a diagnostic decision-support tool called BioEP. To assess the utility of BioEP for aiding clinical decision making, we conducted a prospective single-site diagnostic belief updating study (NCT05764252). Eighty-six adults with suspected seizures attended a nurse-led, first-seizure clinic. Using a 7-point scale ranging from virtually certain to exceptionally unlikely, two clinicians independently rated the probability of having another epileptic seizure before and after reviewing BioEP scores. Recruitment took place over 1 year. The probability ratings changed (beliefs updated) by at least one category in 35/86 participants for Reviewer 1 (41%; 95% confidence interval: 30-51%) and in 58/86 people for Reviewer 2 (67%; 58 to 77%). The impact of the presentation of new evidence from the BioEP score on reviewer beliefs was substantial and bidirectional. For Reviewer 1 n=20 lower and n=15 higher probability, with n=37 lower and n=21 higher probability for Reviewer 2. Future research will explore the impact of these biomarkers on long-term diagnostic decision making and examine robustness and generalisability in multi-site settings.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.