MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1938670898 · doi:10.1111/epi.12983

The diagnostic utility of intracranial <scp>EEG</scp> monitoring for epilepsy surgery in children

2015· article· en· W1938670898 on OpenAlexaff
Paula Brna, Michael Duchowny, Trevor Resnick, Catalina Dunoyer, Sanjiv Bhatia, Prasanna Jayakar

Bibliographic record

VenueEpilepsia · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpilepsyEpilepsy surgeryElectroencephalographyTemporal lobeMagnetic resonance imagingMedicineCortex (anatomy)NeurosciencePsychologyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: There are limited data on the indications for the use of chronic invasive electroencephalography (EEG) monitoring (IEM) for pediatric epilepsy surgery. METHODS: We retrospectively studied 102 children who underwent intracranial monitoring to map critical cortex, localize the epileptogenic region, or resolve divergent findings. We assessed IEM utility based on changes to the resection plan following analysis of noninvasive data. RESULTS: IEM was judged useful in 87% of cases and had greatest utility for resolving discordant data and localizing extratemporal and multilobar epileptogenic zones. IEM data were least useful for seizure onset in the temporal lobe and had little utility for direct cortical stimulation mapping unless functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) revealed atypical language representation or the epileptogenic zone was in proximity to critical cortex. SIGNIFICANCE: IEM utility was demonstrated for a majority of cases with well-defined indications. The method of assessing utility will facilitate multicentric studies toward developing future consensus and practice guidelines.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.272 · 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.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations24
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpilepsiaSame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207