Skip to main content
. 2020 Jan 21;77(5):1–9. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2019.4785

Table 1. Participant and Smartphone Video Characteristics by VEM Final Diagnoses.

Features ES (n = 11) PNEA (n = 30) PhysNEE (n = 3) Overall (N = 44)
Participants
Women, No. (%) 8 (72) 23 (76) 0 (0) 31 (70)
Age, mean (range), y 46.3 (23-79) 43.8 (20-80) 54.3 (28-82) 45.1 (20-82)
Length of VEM, mean (range), d 3.2 (2-5) 3.1 (1-9) 2.7 (2-4) 3.1 (1-9)
Smartphone video
Length of smartphone videos, mean (range), s 138.5 (9-399) 136.7 (10-543) 88.3 (10-227) 133.8 (9-543)
Adequacy of technical recording (scale, 0-10), median (IQR) 7 (5-8) 7 (5-8) 4 (1-6) 7 (4-8)
Reviews per smartphone video, mean (range) 12.5 (8-15) 11.7 (2-15) 13.7 (13-15) 12.0 (2-15)
By experts, mean (range) 7.0 (4-9) 6.4 (1-9) 7.3 (7-8) 6.6 (1-9)
By residents, mean (range) 5.5 (4-6) 5.4 (1-8) 6.3 (5-8) 5.5 (1-8)
Total smartphone video reviews per diagnosis, No. 137 352 41 530

Abbreviations: ES, epileptic seizure; IQR, interquartile range; PNEA, psychogenic nonepileptic attack; PhysNEE, physiologic nonepileptic events; VEM, video electroencephalogram monitoring.