MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062870268 · doi:10.1016/j.seizure.2012.03.014

Circadian profiles of focal epileptic seizures: A need for reappraisal

2012· review· en· W2062870268 on OpenAlexafffund
Alexander Mirzoev, Eduard Bercovici, Lee S. Stewart, Miguel A. Cortez, O. Carter Snead, Mary Desrocher

Bibliographic record

VenueSeizure · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicCircadian rhythm and melatonin
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of TorontoYork University
FundersConnaught FundYork UniversityUniversity Health Network
KeywordsCircadian rhythmEpilepsyTemporal lobeNeurosciencePsychologyElectroencephalographyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Circadian rhythm of seizure is underestimated in the study of focal epilepsies. A review of the current literature revealed a clear correlation between cortical epileptogenic focus and the circadian phase of seizure peak occurrence in adult patients. A single diurnal peak at 19:00 was found in seizures originating from the occipital lobe, between 5:00 and 7:00 in frontal lobe seizures, and between 16:00 and 17:00 h in temporal lobe seizures. Two diurnal peaks, between 5:00 and 7:00, and at 23:00 are reported in seizures from the parietal lobe, and between 7:00 to 8:00 and 16:00 to 17:00 in mesial temporal onset seizures. This circadian character of seizure occurrence in focal epilepsies may not be unique to partial seizures since recent clinical and experimental data indicate that generalized seizures also demonstrate circadian effects. The clinical evidence on generalized seizures and epilepsies is not recent, but a formal integration of circadian rhythmicity in our understanding and clinical management of epilepsies may be warranted.

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)0.002
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations48
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueSeizureSame topicCircadian rhythm and melatoninFrench-language works237,207