INTRODUCTION: Emergent electroencephalography (emEEG) is increasingly employed in the emergency department (ED) for evaluating altered consciousness and seizure-related conditions, yet standardized criteria guiding its use remain limited. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 1,018 patients (mean age 66 ± 20 years; 48.4% female) undergoing emEEG at the ED of the Careggi Teaching Hospital (Florence, Italy) in 2023. Clinical, anamnestic, and neuroimaging data available at admission were used to train supervised machine-learning (ML) models. We evaluated tree-based ensembles (Random Forest and XGBoost) to predict abnormal and epileptiform emEEG, as well as confirmation or refutation of initial diagnosis. Ground-truth labels were derived from a multidisciplinary expert team including neurologists, neurophysiopathologists and intensivists. Model performance was assessed with 5 × 5 nested cross-validation, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, balanced accuracy, decision-curve analysis, and Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP) interpretability. RESULTS: Abnormal emEEG occurred in 691 cases (67.9%), epileptiform activity in 192 patients (18.9%). emEEG ruled out the initial diagnostic suspicion in 514 cases (50.5%) and confirmed it in 188 cases (18.5%). Best performance was obtained with Random Forest for abnormal emEEG (AUC 0.79, 95% CI: 0.76-0.82) and diagnosis rule-out (0.84, 0.81-0.86), and with XGBoost for epileptiform emEEG (0.82, 0.78-0.85) and diagnosis confirmation (0.82, 0.79-0.85). Performance varied by initial diagnostic suspicion, but subgroup-stratified analyses showed overall consistent patterns. Key predictive features included altered consciousness, prior brain lesions, antiseizure therapy, and seizure-related presentations. Interpretability analyses revealed seizure-centric features drove confirmation, while systemic or nonspecific features favored refutation. CONCLUSIONS: Interpretable ML models using only admission data can predict emEEG outcomes and anticipate their diagnostic contribution, supporting triage and decision-making in emergency neurology without replacing clinical judgment. Models and explanations were easily usable on a freely-accessible website ( www.emergencyeeg.com ), where tools return probabilistic outputs for all four prediction tasks together with per-patient explanation plots, enabling transparent and reproducible use. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
Scarpino et al. (Fri,) studied this question.