How many adults with temporal epilepsy have a mild course and do not require epilepsy surgery?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) is the most common type of drug-resistant epilepsy in adults and commonly requires surgical treatment. While an overwhelming preponderance of literature supports the notion that a large percentage of patients with TLE benefit from surgery, there is a paucity of outcome data on patients who demonstrate a sustained response to pharmacological treatment. In this study, we present an adult cohort of patients with TLE, with the purpose of identifying the proportion of patients with a mild course of the disease, as well as potential risk factors. A prospective cohort study of all patients with TLE assessed and followed by the Saskatchewan Epilepsy Program, from 1 March 2007 to Jan 29(th) 2014. Patients were dichotomized as having a mild (seizure freedom without surgical intervention) or severe (surgical intervention required and/or failure to achieve seizure remission) course. Descriptive statistics, odds ratios and confidence intervals were calculated to identify predictors of seizure freedom. The cohort consisted of 159 patients. Mean patient age at last follow-up visit was 46±14.4 (range: 19-88) years. Mean follow-up period was 43.4±22.6 (6 to 84) months. Forty-six patients (29%) demonstrated mild-course TLE while 113 (71%) had a severe course of TLE. Patients with a mild course of TLE were more likely to be older (p = 0.002), have late-onset epilepsy (p < 0.001) with shorter evolution (p < 0.001). A good response to the first antiepileptic drug (OR: 6.8; 95% CI: 2.5-19; p < 0.001) was associated with a mild course of TLE. Although a majority of patients with TLE eventually require surgery, operative treatment is not necessary for all patients. This study identifies prognostic factors that may help patients and clinicians characterize long-term outcome.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".