Device sensitivity and false alarms can reshape regression-to-the-mean in simulated epilepsy trials
Discuss this preprint
Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?Listed in
This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.Abstract
Automated seizure detection devices are increasingly plausible tools for epilepsy trials, but no device is perfect. We used CHOCOLATES, a realistic seizure diary simulator, to examine how device sensitivity and false alarm rate (FAR) affect regression-to-the-mean (RTM) and placebo median percentage change (MPC) in a simulated randomized trial design. For each device condition, 100,000 potential participants were generated; eligibility was assessed during a 2-month baseline, followed by a 3-month test period. With FAR fixed at 0, reducing sensitivity from 100% to 10% increased the fraction of eligible participants exhibiting RTM from 38.2% to 64.8% and increased placebo MPC from 14.7% to 48.1%. With sensitivity fixed at 100% and expected FAR correction, increasing FAR from 0 to 1 alarm/day increased RTM from 38.2% to 53.2% and placebo MPC from 14.7% to 31.3%. Imperfect seizure detection can therefore change the apparent placebo response expected from RTM.
Short summary for table of contents
In simulated epilepsy trials, imperfect seizure detection altered regression to the mean and placebo median percentage change. Trial planning should model detector sensitivity and false alarm rate before device-derived seizure counts are used as endpoints.