MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Combining EEG and fMRI in the study of epileptic discharges

2011· review· en· W1919574138 on OpenAlexafffund
Jean Gotman, Francesca Pittau

Bibliographic record

VenueEpilepsia · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsIctalEpilepsyElectroencephalographyEEG-fMRINeuroscienceThalamusFunctional magnetic resonance imagingTemporal lobePsychologyMagnetic resonance imagingSpike-and-waveCerebral blood flowFrontal lobeMedicineCardiologyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The combining of electroencephalography (EEG) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) is a unique noninvasive method for investigating the brain regions involved at the time of epileptic discharges. The neuronal discharges taking place during an interictal spike or spike-wave burst result in an increase in metabolism and blood flow, which is reflected in the blood oxygen-level dependent (BOLD) signal measured by fMRI. This increase is most intense in the region generating the discharge but is also present in regions affected by the discharge. On occasion, epileptic discharges result in decreased metabolism, the origin of which is only partially understood. EEG-fMRI applied to focal epilepsy results in maxima of the BOLD signal most often concordant with other methods of localization and has been shown to help in localizing epileptic foci in nonlesional frontal lobe epilepsy. It has also demonstrated the involvement of the thalamus in generalized epileptic discharges. In patients with new-onset epilepsy it could be used to evaluate the source and extent of the brain structures involved during discharges and their evolution as the disease progresses.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.973
Threshold uncertainty score0.832

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations107
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpilepsiaSame topicFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesFrench-language works237,207