MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2408691160 · doi:10.1017/s0317167100052586

P300 in Behcet's Patients without Neurological Manifestations

2001· article· en· W2408691160 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hulusi Keçeci, Melih Akyol

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Diseases and Behçet’s Syndrome
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubclinical infectionMedicineAbnormalityBehcet's diseaseLatency (audio)Stroke (engine)Internal medicineDiseaseAudiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Behcet's disease is the association of recurrent aphthous stomatitis with genital ulceration and eye disease. Neurologic involvement patterns include meningomyelitis, a brain stem syndrome, pyramidal and extrapyramidal abnormality and stroke. In the present study, subclinical involvement was investigated by using P300 in Behcet's patients without neurological manifestation. METHODS: Fifteen patients and 15 healthy volunteers were accepted for the study. P300 from vertex (Cz) electrode sites of the 10-20 system using electrodes and motor response time were recorded. RESULTS: Patients had significantly prolonged latencies of P300 as compared to normal controls (p=0.013) but no significant differences in amplitude (p=1.000). Patients showed a significantly delayed motor response time than controls (p=0.006). Nine patients (60%) had P300 latency and eight patients (53.3%) had motor response time values exceeding the mean of controls by two standard deviations. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that the P300 measures and motor response time may reflect subclinical neurologic involvement in Behcet's disease.

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)0.003
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
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations19
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences NeurologiquesSame topicOcular Diseases and Behçet’s SyndromeFrench-language works237,207