Computerized EEG in the courtroom

With the advent of modern computers, quantitative techniques have proliferated enormously in EEG and evoked potential research. For more than a decade, several manufacturers have offered commercial computerized EEG (CEEG) systems, advertised specifically for clinical use. Such applications generally involve comparison of the patient against a database of normal individuals. CEEG remains highly controversial in the clinical setting, with statements from individual experts and from several medical specialty societies warning against its potential for error, misinterpretation, and a b u ~ e . l ~ There is a paucity of actual data about the use and validity of CEEG in clinical practice. Some physicians apply CEEG routinely, claiming to obtain a higher degree of sensitivity than is possible with conventional recordings. Such results are difficult to evaluate independently if the underlying data are unavailable. However, when the reports appear in the courtroom, the data can be obtained for review, and the reasoning behind the interpretation is often presented extensively in formal depositions. I reviewed 15 CEEG studies from 12 consecutive medical-legal cases in which the results were presented as advanced scientific evidence to support the existence of a brain injury.