MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Monitoring for Adverse Effects of Antiepileptic Drugs

2006· article· en· W1987495072 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Camfield, Carol Camfield

Bibliographic record

VenueEpilepsia · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmacological Effects and Toxicity Studies
Canadian institutionsIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEpilepsyAdverse effectAntiepileptic drugClinical neurologyPharmacologyNeurosciencePsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Best practices for monitoring the adverse effects of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) have not been carefully studied. Routine blood and urine studies do not appear to be of value in asymptomatic patients to avoid severe acute reactions. Subtle chronic AED side effects exist but algorithms for their detection and treatment are not well developed. Randomized clinical trials do not support the value of routine AED serum levels to improve compliance, seizure control, or avoid side effects. Simple screening procedures for neurotoxicity have not been developed. Some personal suggestions are offered.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.349
Threshold uncertainty score0.361

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations29
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpilepsiaSame topicPharmacological Effects and Toxicity StudiesFrench-language works237,207