MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072309637 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0097618

Effects of Anterior Thalamic Nucleus Deep Brain Stimulation in Chronic Epileptic Rats

2014· article· en· W2072309637 on OpenAlexaff
Luciene Covolan, Antônio-Carlos G. de Almeida, Beatriz Amorim, Clarissa F. Cavarsan, Maísa Ferreira Miranda, Mayra C. Aarão, Ana Paula Madureira, Antônio Márcio Rodrigues, José N. Nóbrega, Luiz E. Mello, Clement Hamani

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoToronto Western HospitalCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
KeywordsDeep brain stimulationStimulationStatus epilepticusEpilepsyMedicinePilocarpineAnesthesiaHippocampal formationElectrophysiologyNeuroscienceInternal medicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) has been investigated for the treatment of epilepsy. In rodents, an increase in the latency for the development of seizures and status epilepticus (SE) has been reported in different animal models but the consequences of delivering stimulation to chronic epileptic animals have not been extensively addressed. We study the effects of anterior thalamic nucleus (AN) stimulation at different current intensities in rats rendered epileptic following pilocarpine (Pilo) administration. Four months after Pilo-induced SE, chronic epileptic rats were bilaterally implanted with AN electrodes or had sham-surgery. Stimulation was delivered for 6 h/day, 5 days/week at 130 Hz, 90 µsec. and either 100 µA or 500 µA. The frequency of spontaneous recurrent seizures in animals receiving stimulation was compared to that recorded in the preoperative period and in rats given sham treatment. To investigate the effects of DBS on hippocampal excitability, brain slices from animals receiving AN DBS or sham surgery were studied with electrophysiology. We found that rats treated with AN DBS at 100 µA had a 52% non-significant reduction in the frequency of seizures as compared to sham-treated controls and 61% less seizures than at baseline. Animals given DBS at 500 µA had 5.1 times more seizures than controls and a 2.8 fold increase in seizure rate as compared to preoperative values. In non-stimulated controls, the average frequency of seizures before and after surgery remained unaltered. In vitro recordings have shown that slices from animals previously given DBS at 100 µA had a longer latency for the development of epileptiform activity, shorter and smaller DC shifts, and a smaller spike amplitude compared to non-stimulated controls. In contrast, a higher spike amplitude was recorded in slices from animals given AN DBS at 500 µA.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.242
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations69
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicNeurological disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207