Technical evaluation of sEEGnal automated EEG preprocessing pipeline versus expert-driven manual methods
This source represents a methodological development and technical evaluation rather than a clinical trial or systematic review. The study focuses on the sEEGnal automated EEG preprocessing pipeline, comparing it to expert-driven manual preprocessing. No specific patient population, sample size, or setting is reported, as this is a technical assessment of the pipeline itself.
Regarding primary outcomes, the preprocessing metadata—including bad channels, artifact duration, and rejected components—as well as EEG-derived measures showed performance comparable to expert-driven preprocessing. The direction of this result is described as comparable, with no specific effect size, absolute numbers, or p-values reported.
For secondary outcomes concerning variability and consistency, the pipeline demonstrated reduced variability and increased consistency compared to human experts. The direction of this improvement is noted, but specific effect sizes, absolute numbers, or statistical confidence intervals were not reported. Safety data, adverse events, and tolerability were not reported.
The authors note that this evaluation supports sEEGnal as a robust and scalable solution for automated EEG preprocessing in both research and large-scale applications. However, readers should not infer clinical efficacy or patient outcomes from this technical evaluation of a preprocessing pipeline, nor assume a specific patient population or sample size as none are reported.