Contribution of EEG/fMRI to the definition of the epileptic focus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the clinical relevance of EEG/fMRI in patients with focal epilepsy, by assessing the information it adds to the scalp EEG in the definition of the epileptic focus. METHODS: Forty-three patients with focal epilepsy were studied with EEG/fMRI using a 3-T scanner. Blood oxygen level-dependent (BOLD) signal changes related to interictal epileptic discharges (IEDs) were classified as concordant or not concordant with the scalp EEG spike field and as contributory if the BOLD signal provided additional information to the scalp EEG about the epileptic focus or not contributory if it did not. We considered patients having intracerebral EEG or a focal lesion on MRI as having independent validation. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients had at least 3 IEDs during the EEG/fMRI acquisition (active EEG), and all had a BOLD response. In 29 of 33 (88%) patients, the BOLD response was concordant, and in 21 of 33 (64%) patients, the BOLD response was contributory. Fourteen patients had an independent validation: in 12 of these 14, the BOLD responses were validated and in 2 they were invalidated. CONCLUSIONS: A BOLD response was present in all patients with active EEG, and more specific localization of the epileptic focus was gained from EEG/fMRI in half of the patients who were scanned, when compared with scalp EEG alone. This study demonstrates that EEG/fMRI, in the context of a clinical practice, may contribute to the localization of the interictal epileptic generator in patients with focal epilepsy.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".