Volume 65, Issue 5 pp. 1176-1202
CRITICAL REVIEW

Computer vision for automated seizure detection and classification: A systematic review

Brandon M. Brown

Brandon M. Brown

Department of Neurology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Aidan M. H. Boyne

Aidan M. H. Boyne

Department of Neurology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Adel M. Hassan

Adel M. Hassan

Department of Neurology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Anthony K. Allam

Anthony K. Allam

Department of Neurology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA

Search for more papers by this author
R. James Cotton

R. James Cotton

Shirley Ryan Ability Lab, Chicago, Illinois, USA

Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Zulfi Haneef

Corresponding Author

Zulfi Haneef

Department of Neurology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA

Neurology Care Line, Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, Houston, Texas, USA

Correspondence

Zulfi Haneef, Department of Neurology, Baylor College of Medicine, 7200 Cambridge St #9A, Houston, TX 77030, USA.

Email: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 01 March 2024
Citations: 1

Abstract

Computer vision (CV) shows increasing promise as an efficient, low-cost tool for video seizure detection and classification. Here, we provide an overview of the fundamental concepts needed to understand CV and summarize the structure and performance of various model architectures used in video seizure analysis. We conduct a systematic literature review of the PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases from January 1, 2000 to September 15, 2023, to identify the strengths and limitations of CV seizure analysis methods and discuss the utility of these models when applied to different clinical seizure phenotypes. Reviews, nonhuman studies, and those with insufficient or poor quality data are excluded from the review. Of the 1942 records identified, 45 meet inclusion criteria and are analyzed. We conclude that the field has shown tremendous growth over the past 2 decades, leading to several model architectures with impressive accuracy and efficiency. The rapid and scalable detection offered by CV models holds the potential to reduce sudden unexpected death in epilepsy and help alleviate resource limitations in epilepsy monitoring units. However, a lack of standardized, thorough validation measures and concerns about patient privacy remain important obstacles for widespread acceptance and adoption. Investigation into the performance of models across varied datasets from clinical and nonclinical environments is an essential area for further research.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT

Z.H. receives research support but no salary support from NEL, which develops and markets the Nelli device discussed in this paper. We confirm that we have read the Journal's position on issues involved in ethical publication and affirm that this report is consistent with those guidelines.

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Data abstracted for the study are available upon reasonable request.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.

click me