MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016779763 · doi:10.1212/wnl.0b013e318211c3dd

Nonconvulsive seizures among critically ill children

2011· letter· en· W2016779763 on OpenAlexafffund
Cecil D. Hahn

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology · 2011
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCritically illMedicineIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Seizures are a common manifestation of brain injury from diverse causes. In the intensive care unit (ICU), seizures present a particular diagnostic challenge: among critically ill patients, seizures frequently manifest with only subtle signs, or are entirely nonconvulsive (subclinical), without any clinical manifestations. Clinical assessment may be further clouded by the use of sedative medications or neuromuscular blocking agents. Seizures in this setting may be detectable only by EEG. Identification of nonconvulsive seizures is important because there is reason to believe that they may worsen brain injury, and therefore warrant treatment.1,–,4 In the current issue of Neurology ®, Abend and colleagues5 describe a series of critically ill children with altered mental status who underwent continuous EEG (cEEG) monitoring according to locally established clinical practice guidelines. They observed that 46 out of 100 children experienced seizures, of whom 70% had exclusively nonconvulsive seizures and 30% had both convulsive and nonconvulsive seizures. All children who experienced seizures had at least some nonconvulsive seizures. These observations substantiate the findings of several prior retrospective studies of critically ill infants and children that reported nonconvulsive seizure rates of …

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.260 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations3
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurologySame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207