Derivation and initial validation of a surgical grading scale for the preliminary evaluation of adult patients with drug‐resistant focal epilepsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Presently, there is no simple method at initial presentation for identifying a patient's likelihood of progressing to surgery and a favorable outcome. The Epilepsy Surgery Grading Scale (ESGS) is a three-tier empirically derived mathematical scale with five categories: magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), electroencephalography (EEG), concordance (between MRI and EEG), semiology, and IQ designed to stratify patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsy based on their likelihood of proceeding to resective epilepsy surgery and achieving seizure freedom. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we abstracted data from the charts of all patients admitted to the New York University Langone Medical Center (NYULMC) for presurgical evaluation or presented in surgical multidisciplinary conference (MDC) at the NYU Comprehensive Epilepsy Center (CEC) from 1/1/2007 to 7/31/2008 with focal epilepsy, who met minimal criteria for treatment resistance. We classified patients into ESGS Grade 1 (most favorable), Grade 2 (intermediate), and Grade 3 (least favorable candidates). Three cohorts were evaluated: all patients, patients presented in MDC, and patients who had resective surgery. The primary outcome measure was proceeding to surgery and seizure freedom. RESULTS: Four hundred seven patients met eligibility criteria; 200 (49.1%) were presented in MDC and 113 (27.8%) underwent surgery. A significant difference was observed between Grades 1 and 3, Grades 1 and 2, and Grades 2 and 3 for all presurgical patients, and those presented in MDC, with Grade 1 patients having the highest likelihood of both having surgery and becoming seizure-free. There was no difference between Grades 1 and 2 among patients who had resective surgery. SIGNIFICANCE: These results demonstrate that by systematically using basic information available during initial assessment, patients with drug-resistant epilepsy may be successfully stratified into clinically meaningful groups with varied prognosis. The ESGS may improve communication, facilitate decision making and early referral to a CEC, and allow patients and physicians to better manage expectations.
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 | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".