An interventional study of SeizEAR in Epilepsy, sponsored by Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai. Recruiting at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 70 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-09-14.
Sponsored by Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai · Not applicable, Interventional, and Device feasibility
Determine the safety and feasibility of an in-ear device to measure seizures or suspected seizures compared to the standard scalp-based electroencephalogram (EEG). The study team anticipates enrolling five healthy participants through meeting announcements and a research email list serv in the Neurology Dept. Based on the appropriate positive initial test of healthy individuals, test the in-ear device on 10 participants with seizures or suspected seizures scheduled for a clinical scalp EEG test.
SeizEAR aims to develop an in-ear device for the detection, diagnosis, and management of seizures/epilepsy. In the United States, an estimated 1 in 26 people will develop epilepsy within a lifetime, with 60% of all seizures originating in the temporal region of the brain. Electroencephalogram (EEG) is currently the gold standard for seizure detection, measuring electrical activity of the brain via numerous electrodes placed on the scalp. The demand for EEG has been steadily increasing given its higher accessibility and ability to result in substantial changes to patient management. In particular, pre-surgical evaluation of seizure was studied in the ambulatory setting, with good post-resection outcomes in selected patients with unilateral temporal lobe epilepsy. The EEG technology requires substantial technician training, can lead to patient discomfort, and still incurs high patient costs (roughly 500-3,000$ per order). Furthermore, current EEG interpretation can be complicated by high rates of false detection and poor sensitivity, as signals may be impeded by scalp conditions, the use of hair products, and other concomitant medical devices. SeizEAR will offer a technician-free, easy to use, comfortable, and cost-effective alternative to seizure monitoring. Intra-ear monitoring has been shown to permit real-time detection of seizure activity and allow for prolonged monitoring of abnormal (inter-ictal) discharges. Intra-ear monitoring is particularly suitable for temporal lobe epilepsy, given the proximity of the ear canal to the temporal lobe of the brain. Prior studies have demonstrated that intra-ear monitoring of temporal brain activity can reliably detect temporal lobe seizures with the added benefit of limiting ocular artifact, a common confounder of more traditional scalp EEG. Collaborating with the industry partner, Starkey Hearing Technologies, the researchers aim to prototype SeizEAR with two electrodes targeting the temporal lobe, wired to a signal processor/box. The objective will be to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of a first-generation SeizEAR device to monitor brain waves in healthy controls and participants with seizures or suspected temporal lobe seizures scheduled for a clinical EEG. Long term, the goal will be to validate the clinical efficacy of SeizEAR in detecting seizures
1,848 studies on the registry are indexed under Epilepsy; 422 are open to participants now.
This study's planned enrollment of 15 is below the median of 50 across 1,239 interventional studies indexed under Epilepsy.
Browse Epilepsy studies →Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai is the lead sponsor of 776 studies on the registry; 176 are open to participants now.
Of its 125 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 83 (66%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Healthy Participants
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Phase 3 Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria: Participants with Seizures or Suspected Temporal Lobe Seizures
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
A drug or device being studied in a clinical trial.
It may be new, or already approved and being studied for another use, dose or form. Criteria often leave out people who took part in another study of one within a recent period, commonly 30 days or five half-lives.
A reason a treatment, test or procedure should not be given to a particular person, such as an allergy, another illness or a medicine they take.
Informed consent
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Investigational drug or device
A drug or device being studied in a clinical trial.
It may be new, or already approved and being studied for another use, dose or form. Criteria often leave out people who took part in another study of one within a recent period, commonly 30 days or five half-lives.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Contraindication
A reason a treatment, test or procedure should not be given to a particular person, such as an allergy, another illness or a medicine they take.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Participants with no seizures or suspected temporal lobe seizures.
Device: SeizEAR
Participants with seizures or suspected temporal lobe seizures scheduled for a clinical EEG.
Device: SeizEAR
The in-ear electrode is a two-electrode device that fits snugly into the ear canal of the user. The device electrodes consist of a Ag/AgCl layer over a substrate. In one iteration, the substrate is a silicone rubber. In another iteration, the substrate is copper. The copper iteration consists of a Ag/AgCl ink that is manually applied to the copper, whereas the other iteration is purchased in a finished state with the Ag/Agel already adhered to the silicone. The electrodes are attached to a foam earpiece during the molding process. The foam earbud is made in-house and can be designed to be more firm or less firm.
Also known as: in-ear seizure detection device
Sensitivity
The sensitivity of ear-EEG will be measured by sensitivity the percentage of ear-EEG predictions that overlap with conventional EEG annotations for at least 1 second per 24 hours accordingly. The ear-EEG annotations will be considered as predictions and the conventional EEG annotations as the truth. Any prediction was deemed true if they overlap at least 1 second with the truth. All seizure annotations were either true positive (TP), false positive (FP), or false negative (FN).
Time frame: at week 16
F1 score
The Device F1 Score is a metric used to evaluate the performance of the ear-EEG device in detecting seizures. It is the harmonic mean of precision and recall, providing a balance between these two metrics. Precision is the proportion of true positive (TP) predictions out of all positive predictions (TP + FP), while recall (or sensitivity) is the proportion of true positive (TP) predictions out of all actual seizure events. The F1 Score ranges from 0 to 1, with higher scores indicating better performance in accurately detecting seizures. The performance of ear-EEG will be measured by the device F1 score per 24 hours accordingly.
Time frame: at week 16
Positive predictive value (PPV)
The Device Positive Predictive Value (PPV) is calculated by dividing the number of true positives (TP) by the total number of positive test results (TP + FP), where FP represents false positives. PPV measures the accuracy of the ear-EEG device in predicting seizures, indicating the likelihood that a positive prediction made by the device is a true seizure event. The PPV ranges from 0 to 1, with higher values indicating better accuracy in predicting seizures. The performance of ear-EEG will be measured by the positive predictive value (PPV) per 24 hours accordingly.
Time frame: at week 16
False detection rate
The Device False Detection Rate is a metric used to evaluate the performance of the ear-EEG device in terms of false positives. It is calculated by dividing the number of false positives (FP) by the total number of test results (TP + FP + FN), where TP represents true positives and FN represents false negatives. The false detection rate is typically expressed as the number of false positive predictions per 24 hours. Lower values indicate better performance, with fewer false alarms generated by the device.. The performance of ear-EEG will be measured by false detection rate per 24 hours accordingly.
Time frame: at week 16
Comfort Rating Scale
The Comfort Rating Scale is a 6-item questionnaire that asks participants about their comfort with the device. Responses are on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (not comfortable at all) to 5 (completely comfortable). The items assessed include tightness, weight, security, softness, overall comfort, and overall fit of the device in the ear. Total scores range from 0 to 30, with higher scores indicating greater comfort.
Time frame: at week 16
Plan to share: No — The study is a safety study that has potential IP for Mount Sinai only aggregate data will be published and shared.
No publications or documents are linked to this record.
Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.
Contact study teamGet an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai →