MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Usefulness of language and memory testing during intracarotid amobarbital testing: observations from an fMRI study

2003· article· en· W2081319335 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Albert P. Aldenkamp, Paul Boon, Karel Deblaere, Eric Achten, W.H. Backes, Peter J. Boon, Paul A.M. Hofman, J. Troost, Pieter Vandemaele, R. Jeroen Vermeulen, Kristl Vonck, J. T. Wilmink

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Neurologica Scandinavica · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHemispheric Asymmetry in Neuroscience
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersStichting Epilepsie Instellingen NederlandEpilepsy Foundation
KeywordsAmobarbitalPsychologyNeuroscienceWada testAudiologyCognitive psychologyMedicineTemporal lobeEpilepsy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Several procedures for testing language lateralization and memory function exist during the intracarotid amobarbital test (IAT). The use of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) gives the opportunity to assess the validity of some of these procedures, or at least to inspect the neuronal correlates. A comprehensive fMRI protocol was tested, aimed at addressing aspects of lateralization of language, as well as testing memory in relation to activation of mesiotemporal regions. Here we report observations with possible consequences for the current IAT procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The protocol consisted of three language tasks (overt naming, semantic decision and silent word generation) and two memory tasks (encoding and retrieving visual scenes). The paradigms used a block-related procedure in nine right-handed normal volunteers. During the procedure dynamic weighted full brain images were acquired which are sensitive to the blood oxygenation activation effect. RESULTS: Encoding showed symmetrical bilateral activation in the mesiotemporal regions, specifically the hippocampus, parahippocampal gyrus and fusiform gyrus. With a retrieval task activation of the mesiotemporal areas was restricted to the posterior hippocampal area. Overt object naming showed results, similar to encoding tasks with bilateral activation of hippocampal areas. Silent word generation showed much stronger ability to lateralize than the other two language-related tasks and especially object naming. CONCLUSION: Activation revealed by fMRI activation shows that IAT procedures, using active semantic language processing or comprehensive procedures with multiple language tasks have the highest guarantee for individual activation lateralization. Simple object naming does not guarantee a lateralized language fMRI activation pattern. Of the different memory procedures during IAT, the procedures (Interview and the Montreal) demanding encoding processing will be related to larger areas of bilateral hippocampal activation than procedures (Seattle) exclusively requiring retrieval. Moreover, tasks using recognition of previously presented language items (naming objects) are equally effective for assessing hippocampal activation compared with presenting separate memory items.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations33
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Neurologica ScandinavicaSame topicHemispheric Asymmetry in NeuroscienceFrench-language works237,207