MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2486374170 · doi:10.1097/wnp.0000000000000312

Maximizing the Yield of Rapid Eye Movement Sleep in the Epilepsy Monitoring Unit

2016· article· en· W2486374170 on OpenAlexaff
Marcus Ng

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaHealth Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtifact (error)Sleep (system call)Eye movementEpilepsyIctalRapid eye movement sleepMedicineSlow-wave sleepAudiologySleep StagesElectroencephalographyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyPolysomnographyNeuroscienceComputer scienceOphthalmologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Rapid eye movement (REM) sleep can help localize the epileptogenic zone in multifocal epilepsy when interictal discharges appear diffuse. However, REM sleep is reputedly rare and easily overlooked in the Epilepsy Monitoring Unit (EMU). The aims of this study are to determine the characteristics of REM sleep in a typical EMU and whether using automated artifact recognition can meaningfully enhance REM sleep detection. METHODS: Artifact-based REM sleep detection was applied to 581 nights of EMU recording from 100 patients over 12 months. REM sleep had been manually detected at the time of recording. The index of suspicion for manual detection was raised after 6 months. Artifact-based detection was compared with manual detection, and the impact on localization was assessed. RESULTS: REM sleep occurred in 77% of EMU nights. Thirty-six patients achieved REM sleep nightly and 62 patients on at least one night. Mean admission was 5.83 days. Mean REM sleep duration was 5.92 minutes over 1.88 mean nightly bouts. Raising the level of suspicion increased manual detection rates from 22.6% to 40.5%. The artifact-based detection rate was 96% and provided additional localizing information in 10% of epilepsy patients. CONCLUSIONS: REM sleep is common in the EMU, but bouts are few and brief. Capturing these bouts to maximize the yield of REM sleep in the EMU is made possible by automated artifact recognition whose results could enhance localization of the epileptogenic zone.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.215
Threshold uncertainty score0.324

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical NeurophysiologySame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207