MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971283275 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2014.42

Silas Weir Mitchell on Epilepsy Therapy in the Late 19<sup>th</sup>to Early 20<sup>th</sup>Centuries

2014· article· en· W1971283275 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
David B. Burkholder, Christopher J. Boes

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurology and Historical Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpilepsyPsychiatryMedicineNeurologyPediatricsPsychoanalysisPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Silas Weir Mitchell (1829-1914), one of the fathers of American neurology, is well known for many contributions to neurology. However, his efforts in epilepsy are overshadowed by his other accomplishments. Mitchell introduced a new bromide preparation, lithium bromide, as a viable therapy. His most widely accepted contribution to the field was the introduction of inhaled amyl nitrite for early termination of seizures accompanied by an appropriate aura. Despite the prevalent views on lifestyle modification as a treatment for epilepsy during this time period, as well as Mitchell's own development of the "rest cure" for certain disease states, he was not a proponent of these types of interventions for epilepsy, nor did he support interventions focused on other organ systems, such as abdominal or gynecologic surgery. Mitchell had distinct opinions on the treatment of epilepsy, and helped to advance its therapeutics during his career.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences NeurologiquesSame topicNeurology and Historical StudiesFrench-language works237,207