MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995225600 · doi:10.1093/brain/awt368

Familial risk of epilepsy: a population-based study

2014· article· en· W1995225600 on OpenAlexaff
Anna L. Peljto, Christie Barker‐Cummings, Vincent M. Vasoli, Cynthia L. Leibson, W. Allen Hauser, Jeffrey Buchhalter, Ruth Ottman

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Institute on AgingNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsEpilepsyPopulationMedicinePsychiatryPsychologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Almost all previous studies of familial risk of epilepsy have had potentially serious methodological limitations. Our goal was to address these limitations and provide more rigorous estimates of familial risk in a population-based study. We used the unique resources of the Rochester Epidemiology Project to identify all 660 Rochester, Minnesota residents born in 1920 or later with incidence of epilepsy from 1935-94 (probands) and their 2439 first-degree relatives who resided in Olmsted County. We assessed incidence of epilepsy in relatives by comprehensive review of the relatives' medical records, and estimated age-specific cumulative incidence and standardized incidence ratios for epilepsy in relatives compared with the general population, according to proband and relative characteristics. Among relatives of all probands, cumulative incidence of epilepsy to age 40 was 4.7%, and risk was increased 3.3-fold (95% confidence interval 2.75-5.99) compared with population incidence. Risk was increased to the greatest extent in relatives of probands with idiopathic generalized epilepsies (standardized incidence ratio 6.0) and epilepsies associated with intellectual or motor disability presumed present from birth, which we denoted 'prenatal/developmental cause' (standardized incidence ratio 4.3). Among relatives of probands with epilepsy without identified cause (including epilepsies classified as 'idiopathic' or 'unknown cause'), risk was significantly increased for epilepsy of prenatal/developmental cause (standardized incidence ratio 4.1). Similarly, among relatives of probands with prenatal/developmental cause, risk was significantly increased for epilepsies without identified cause (standardized incidence ratio 3.8). In relatives of probands with generalized epilepsy, standardized incidence ratios were 8.3 (95% confidence interval 2.93-15.31) for generalized epilepsy and 2.5 (95% confidence interval 0.92-4.00) for focal epilepsy. In relatives of probands with focal epilepsy, standardized incidence ratios were 1.0 (95% confidence interval 0.00-2.19) for generalized epilepsy and 2.6 (95% confidence interval 1.19-4.26) for focal epilepsy. Epilepsy incidence was greater in offspring of female probands than in offspring of male probands, and this maternal effect was restricted to offspring of probands with focal epilepsy. The results suggest that risks for epilepsies of unknown and prenatal/developmental cause may be influenced by shared genetic mechanisms. They also suggest that some of the genetic influences on generalized and focal epilepsies are distinct. However, the similar increase in risk for focal epilepsy among relatives of probands with either generalized (2.5-fold) or focal epilepsy (2.6-fold) may reflect some coexisting shared genetic influences.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.294 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations193
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrainSame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207