Bibliographic record
Abstract
Juhn Wada1 and W. James Gardner2 were among the first investigators to anesthetize the cerebral cortex, although their agents and aims differed. Gardner directly injected procaine hydrochloride (Novocain) through holes drilled into the brain, for the purpose of localizing speech in two left-handed patients scheduled for resection of brain tumors. Dr. Wada first used intracarotid amobarbital injections to treat a patient in status epilepticus, and later to direct placement of electrodes for electroconvulsive therapy in psychiatric patients. Subsequently, Dr. Wada and colleagues at the Montreal Neurologic Institute extended his technique to assessment of language and memory in epilepsy surgery patients. The intracarotid amobarbital procedure has emerged in epilepsy surgery centers around the world as the standard method to lateralize speech and memory functions and to prevent or predict the magnitude of related declines following epilepsy surgery. The continuation of this practice has recently been challenged on two fronts, however. First, some have proposed that new methodologies and technologies can replace the Wada. Second, a recent interruption in the supply of amobarbital has caused some centers to seek out novel anesthetic agents. In 2003–2004, there was a shortage of amobarbital on a worldwide basis for at least several months when the manufacturing …
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".