MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Tonic status epilepticus in patients with idiopathic generalized epilepsy

2005· article· en· W2170469550 on OpenAlexaff
Eliane Kobayashi, Pierre Thomas, Frédérick Andermann

Bibliographic record

VenueEpileptic Disorders · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdiopathic generalized epilepsyStatus epilepticusEpilepsyElectroencephalographyMedicineTonic (physiology)NeuropsychologyGeneralized epilepsyAnesthesiaInternal medicineCognitionPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RATIONALE: Tonic status epilepticus (TSE) in patients with idiopathic generalized epilepsy (IGE) is not well recognized. The objective of this study is to report episodes of TSE in patients with IGE. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical and EEG evaluation of three IGE patients who presented TSE. RESULTS: The three patients had mainly clinical features of IGE, but had developed, in addition, focal discharges, diffuse EEG abnormalities and some focal or diffuse neuropsychological dysfunction. The tonic attacks eventually responded to treatment, but were not completely controlled in any of the patients. DISCUSSION: The continuum between IGE and secondary generalized epilepsy is demonstrated in these patients. Most of their clinical and EEG features are however, in keeping with an idiopathic generalized epileptic process with additional focal and diffuse components. Recognition of the significance of TSE in such patients has important therapeutic and prognostic implications. [Published with video sequences].

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpileptic DisordersSame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207