Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
EEG Complexity Analysis of Psychogenic Non-Epileptic and Epileptic Seizures Using Entropy and Machine Learning
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
EEG Complexity Analysis of Psychogenic Non-Epileptic and Epileptic Seizures Using Entropy and Machine Learning
Do you wish to request the book?
EEG Complexity Analysis of Psychogenic Non-Epileptic and Epileptic Seizures Using Entropy and Machine Learning
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
EEG Complexity Analysis of Psychogenic Non-Epileptic and Epileptic Seizures Using Entropy and Machine Learning
2025
Overview
Psychogenic non-epileptic seizures (PNES) are often misdiagnosed as epileptic seizures (ES), leading to inappropriate treatment and delayed psychological care. To address this challenge, we analysed electroencephalogram (EEG) data from 74 patients (46 PNES, 28 ES) using one-minute preictal and interictal recordings per subject. Nine entropy measures (Sample, Fuzzy, Permutation, Dispersion, Conditional, Phase, Spectral, Rényi, and Wavelet entropy) were evaluated individually to classify PNES from ES using k-nearest neighbours, Naïve Bayes, linear discriminant analysis, logistic regression, support vector machine, random forest, multilayer perceptron, and XGBoost within a leave-one-subject-out cross-validation framework. In addition, a dynamic state, defined as the entropy difference between interictal and preictal periods, was examined. Sample, Fuzzy, Conditional, and Dispersion entropy were higher in PNES than in ES during interictal recordings (not significant), but significantly lower in the preictal (p < 0.05) and dynamic states (p < 0.01). Spatial mapping and permutation-based importance analyses highlighted O1, O2, T5, F7, and Pz as key discriminative channels. Classification performance peaked in the dynamic state, with Fuzzy entropy and support vector machine achieving the best results (balanced accuracy = 72.4%, F1 score = 77.8%, sensitivity = 74.5%, specificity = 70.4%). These results demonstrate the potential of entropy features for differentiating PNES from ES.
Publisher
MDPI AG
Subject
