MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Genetic Focal Epilepsies: State of the Art and Paths to the Future

2005· review· en· W2089180138 on OpenAlexaff
Frédérick Andermann, Eliane Kobayashi, Eva Andermann

Bibliographic record

VenueEpilepsia · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpilepsyNeuroscienceMedicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The concept of genetic focal epilepsies is relatively new as compared to awareness of the importance of genetic factors in the generalized epilepsies. However, in the past decade, there has been increasing recognition of families with dominantly inherited partial epilepsies. Better definition of the phenotypes allows identification of distinct syndromes. The main familial focal epilepsies are autosomal-dominant nocturnal frontal lobe epilepsy (ADNFLE), familial mesial TLE (FMTLE), familial lateral TLE (FLTLE), and familial partial epilepsy with variable foci (FPEVF). The only genes identified so far are those for ADNFLE and FLTLE. In these disorders, functional studies are the next step and could provide advances leading to clarification of the pathophysiology as well as to new therapeutic strategies. At present, we can provide genetic counseling and a more accurate prognosis for most of the familial focal epilepsies. Greater awareness of the genetic basis in this group of disorders by the treating physicians is essential for identification of new families. This will allow further linkage studies, candidate gene screening, and identification of new genes, which will hopefully result in genetically based prevention and treatment.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.306 · 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

Citations41
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpilepsiaSame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207