MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2529029285

117 Benign Familial Neonatal Seizures

2010· article· nl· W2529029285 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Perrine Plouin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languagenl
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPediatricsEpilepsyMedicinePenetrancePopulationPsychomotor retardationIdiopathic generalized epilepsyIncidence (geometry)PsychiatryBiologyGeneticsPathology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Short Description Benign Familial Neonatal Seizures (BNFS) were first reported as Benign Familial Neonatal Convulsions by Rett and Teubel (1964) (> Fig. 117-1). It is a rare, dominantly inherited epileptic syndrome with a penetrance as high as 85%. Since 1989, BFNS have been listed among ‘‘idiopathic generalized epilepsies and syndromes’’ in the International Classification of Epilepsies, Epileptic Syndromes and Related Disorders. These syndromes do not strictly fulfill the criteria of idiopathic generalized epilepsies (IGE): the typical trait of generalized spike–wave discharge is not present, and seizures are not generalized. But it can be argued that the immaturity of the central nervous system is responsible for this lack. Nevertheless, Benign Neonatal seizures (BNS) are defined by a favorable outcome, i.e., a normal psychomotor development and the absence of secondary epilepsy. The best estimate of the population rate for BFNS comes from a recent prospective, population-based study that involved all obstetric and neonatal units across the province of Newfoundland, Canada (Ronen et al. 1999). Five cases of BFNS were observed among 34,615 live births from 1 January 1990 to 31 December 1994. Thus, the incidence of BFNS was reported as 14.4 per 100,000 live births.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEpilepsy research and treatment→French-language works237,207→