MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2313726208 · doi:10.1227/neu.0b013e31822b30cd

Neuromodulation in Epilepsy

2011· review· en· W2313726208 on OpenAlexaff
Faisal Alotaibi, Clement Hamani, Andrés M. Lozano

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurosurgery · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVagus Nerve Stimulation Research
Canadian institutionsToronto Western Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuromodulationMedicineVagus nerve stimulationEpilepsyNeuroscienceNeurostimulationDeep brain stimulationSubthalamic nucleusStimulationThalamusBrain stimulationVagus nerveParkinson's diseasePsychologyInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neuromodulation strategies have been proposed to treat a variety of neurological disorders, including medication-resistant epilepsy. Electrical stimulation of both central and peripheral nervous systems has emerged as a possible alternative for patients who are not deemed to be good candidates for resective procedures. In addition to well-established treatments such as vagus nerve stimulation, epilepsy centers around the world are investigating the safety and efficacy of neurostimulation at different brain targets, including the hippocampus, thalamus, and subthalamic nucleus. Also promising are the preliminary results of responsive neuromodulation studies, which involve the delivery of stimulation to the brain in response to detected epileptiform or preepileptiform activity. In addition to electrical stimulation, novel therapeutic methods that may open new horizons in the management of epilepsy include transcranial magnetic stimulation, focal drug delivery, cellular transplantation, and gene therapy. We review the current strategies and future applications of neuromodulation in 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 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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.005

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 head0.302
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.100 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations67
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurosurgerySame topicVagus Nerve Stimulation ResearchFrench-language works237,207