MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Pathogenesis of Lennox‐Gastaut syndrome: Considerations and hypotheses

2001· article· en· W1876697085 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEpileptic Disorders · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLennox–Gastaut syndromeNeuroscienceEpilepsyEpilepsy syndromesEtiologyPathogenesisSeizure typesPsychologyMedicinePsychiatryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

No other epilepsy more substantially combines cryptogenicity and intractability than does Lennox-Gastaut Syndrome. Although antecedent neurological conditions have preceded LGS in some patients, others with similar ills fail to develop this syndrome, and precise charting of the pathway between any presumed aetiology and the epilepsy has eluded researchers. Despite these frustrations, LGS has elicited a host of publications over the years, possibly because it combines features of many other epileptic disorders and thereby occupies a crossroads position among them. Lacking a comprehensive experimental model of LGS, this article combines relevant data from several clinical and basic sources in order to formulate a concept of pathogenesis. Data are presented to suggest that the occurrence of factors enhancing excitability during a vulnerable period of cortical and thalamic development may permanently imprint a bilateral, diffuse epileptogenic system upon the mammalian brain.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.374
Threshold uncertainty score0.536

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it