Analysis of shape and positioning of the hippocampal formation: an MRI study in patients with partial epilepsy and healthy controls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate systematically shape and positioning of the hippocampal formation (HF) in patients with partial epilepsy related to malformations of cortical development (MCD) and those with temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE). We studied 76 patients with MCD, including focal cortical dysplasia (n = 29; lesions located outside the temporal lobe in all), heterotopia (lesions outside of the temporal lobe, n = 14; lesions extending into the temporal lobe, n = 16), polymicrogyria (bilateral perisylvian, n = 14; unilateral perisylvian, n = 3) and 30 patients with TLE (hippocampal atrophy, n = 15; normal hippocampal volumes, n = 15). Shape and positioning of the HF were evaluated using a set of eight predefined morphological characteristics. In addition, the degree of hippocampal vertical orientation and medial positioning were assessed quantitatively. Patients were compared with 50 healthy controls. At least three criteria describing abnormal HF shape and positioning were found in 5/50 (10%) healthy controls, 37/76 (49%) MCD and 13/30 (43%) TLE patients. An association with all criteria was found in MCD and TLE, but not in healthy controls. In MCD there was no association between the side of HF shape abnormalities and the side of the cortical malformation or the EEG focus. Likewise, in TLE, HF abnormalities were not related to the side of the EEG focus. In both MCD and TLE patients who had hippocampal atrophy, no association was found between the side of HF shape abnormalities and the side of atrophy. Abnormal HF shape and positioning are found in a similar proportion in MCD and TLE. In TLE, they may be a marker of a more extensive disorder of brain development and may participate in the development of this condition.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".