MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114678576 · doi:10.1080/13554790802603679

A case study of long-term cognitive and social functioning following a right temporal lobectomy in infancy

2008· article· en· W2114678576 on OpenAlexaff
Catherine A. Hynes, Raymond A. Mar

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurocase · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeurosurgeryCognitionPsychologyEpilepsyCognitive skillBorderline intellectual functioningTemporal lobeAnterior temporal lobectomyPediatricsDevelopmental psychologyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the rare case of an adult patient, FS, who had a right anterior temporal lobe resection during infancy to treat intractable epilepsy, and underwent a cognitive evaluation 19 years later. Given the paucity of literature on long-term outcomes for infants who receive neurosurgery for epilepsy, this case provides valuable information for both clinicians and patients. What little literature exists on infant and child surgical outcomes for epilepsy suggests a variable course, with several areas of possible cognitive and social difficulty. FS's assessment at the age of 21 revealed only mild difficulties with memory, sequencing, and visual imagery, and spared intellectual functioning, working memory, problem-solving and social cognition, along with a high level of socioeconomic functioning. Thus, the case of FS suggests that neurosurgery during infancy is not necessarily associated with large-scale cognitive impairment, and furthermore, that high levels of functioning both educationally and vocationally are possible after surgical treatment of epilepsy in infancy.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations3
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurocaseSame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207