Global assessment of the severity of epilepsy (GASE) Scale in children: Validity, reliability, responsiveness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The Global Assessment of Severity of Epilepsy (GASE) Scale is a single-item, 7-point global rating scale designed for neurologist-report of overall severity of epilepsy in children. Building on previous preliminary evidence of its validity and reliability for research and clinical use, this study evaluated the GASE Scale's construct validity, reliability, and responsiveness to changes in severity of epilepsy. METHODS: Data used for the study arose from the Health-Related Quality of Life in Children with Epilepsy Study (HERQULES), a 2-year multicenter prospective cohort study (n = 374) with observations taken at baseline, and 6, 12, and 24 months after diagnosis. Construct validity and reliability were quantified using Spearman's correlation and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Responsiveness was assessed using both distribution-based and anchor-based indices. RESULTS: The GASE Scale was at least moderately correlated (r ≥ 0.30) with several key clinical aspects and most strongly correlated with frequency and intensity of seizures and interference of epilepsy or drugs with daily activities (r > 0.30). Total variation in GASE Scale scores explained by seven core clinical aspects of epilepsy increased over time (R(2) = 28% at baseline to R(2) = 70% at 24 months). The GASE Scale had modest test-retest reliability (ICC range: 0.52-0.64) and was responsive to changes in clinical criteria (standardized response mean range: 0.49-0.68; probability of change range: 0.69-0.75; Guyatt's responsiveness statistic range: 0.56-0.84). The GASE Scale showed potential to discriminate "stable" and "changed" patients according to select criteria and to a composite score (area under the receiver operating characteristic [ROC] curve range: 0.50-0.67). SIGNIFICANCE: Results offer additional evidence in support of the GASE Scale's validity, reliability, as well as responsiveness to changes in severity of epilepsy in children. We conclude that the GASE Scale is a potentially useful tool for assessing the severity of epilepsy in both clinical and research settings.
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 | 0.004 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".