MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089752636 · doi:10.1088/1741-2560/12/2/026011

Defining regions of interest using cross-frequency coupling in extratemporal lobe epilepsy patients

2015· article· en· W2089752636 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neural Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkToronto Western HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsEpilepsyTemporal lobeEpilepsy surgeryLobeModulation (music)ElectroencephalographyAmplitudeRhythmCoupling (piping)MedicinePhysicsPsychologyAudiologyNeuroscienceAnatomyInternal medicineOpticsMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Clinicians identify seizure onset zones (SOZs) for resection in an attempt to localize the epileptogenic zone (EZ), which is the cortical tissue that is indispensible for seizure generation. An automated system is proposed to objectively localize this EZ by identifying regions of interest (ROIs). METHODS: Intracranial electroencephalogram recordings were obtained from seven patients presenting with extratemporal lobe epilepsy and the interaction between neuronal rhythms in the form of phase-amplitude coupling was investigated. Modulation of the amplitude of high frequency oscillations (HFOs) by the phase of low frequency oscillations was measured by computing the modulation index (MI). Delta- (0.5-4 Hz) and theta- (4-8 Hz) modulation of HFOs (30-450 Hz) were examined across the channels of a 64-electrode subdural grid. Surrogate analysis was performed and false discovery rates were computed to determine the significance of the modulation observed. Mean MI values were subjected to eigenvalue decomposition (EVD) and channels defining the ROIs were selected based on the components of the eigenvector corresponding to the largest eigenvalue. ROIs were compared to the SOZs identified by two independent neurologists. Global coherence values were also computed. MAIN RESULTS: MI was found to capture the seizure in time for six of seven patients and identified ROIs in all seven. Patients were found to have a poorer post-surgical outcome when the number of EVD-selected channels that were not resected increased. Moreover, in patients who experienced a seizure-free outcome (i.e., Engel Class I) all EVD-selected channels were found to be within the resected tissue or immediately adjacent to it. In these Engel Class I patients, delta-modulated HFOs were found to identify more of the channels in the resected tissue compared to theta-modulated HFOs. However, for the Engel Class IV patient, the delta-modulated HFOs did not identify any of the channels in the resected tissue suggesting that the resected tissue was not appropriate, which was also suggested by the Engel Class IV outcome. A sensitivity of 75.4% and a false positive rate of 15.6% were achieved using delta-modulated HFOs in an Engel Class I patient. SIGNIFICANCE: LFO-modulated HFOs can be used to identify ROIs in extratemporal lobe patients. Moreover, delta-modulated HFOs may provide more accurate localization of the EZ. These ROIs may result in better surgical outcomes when used to compliment the SOZs identified by clinicians for resection.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score0.509

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.207 · 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