Lactic dehydrogenase isoenzyme in cerebrospinal fluid of children with febrile convulsions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To study the lactic dehydrogenase isoenzyme values in children with simple and complex febrile convulsions. METHODS: Cerebrospinal fluid samples were collected from 115 children, 57 with simple febrile convulsions, 27 with complex febrile convulsions and 31 with no neurological or intracranial pathology (controls). Lactic dehydrogenase activity and isoenzyme levels were measured on a Hitachi analyser. RESULTS: Mean total lactic dehydrogenase activity was similar in the three groups. In the control group, lactic dehydrogenase-1 was the main fraction, followed by lactic dehydrogenase-2 and lactic dehydrogenase-3; only small percentages of lactic dehydrogenase-4 and lactic dehydrogenase-5 were detected. In the febrile convulsion group, the lactic dehydrogenase-1 fraction percentage was lower and lactic dehydrogenase-2, lactic dehydrogenase-3 percentages were higher than those in the control group; and the differences were statistically significant between the control and study groups (p < 0.01). Values of lactic dehydrogenase-4 and lactic dehydrogenase-5 were similar in all three groups. CONCLUSION: This is the first report on the lactic dehydrogenase isoenzyme pattern in the cerebrospinal fluid of patients with simple and complex febrile convulsions. The important finding that focal and general febrile convulsions are not associated with cell damage and changes in aerobic and anaerobic metabolism as lactic dehydrogenase remained unchanged. Analysis of cerebrospinal fluid lactic dehydrogenase isoenzyme levels can assist clinicians in differentiating febrile convulsions from clinical situations that might mimic them.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".