MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Is concussion a risk factor for epilepsy?

2017· article· en· W2619898481 on OpenAlexaff
Richard Wennberg, Carmen Hiploylee, Charles H. Tator

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Sports Medicine · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEpilepsyConcussionCohortIncidence (geometry)Retrospective cohort studyPediatricsRisk factorMigrainePopulationPhysical therapyCohort studyInternal medicinePoison controlEmergency medicineInjury preventionPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective It has been stated that concussion is a risk factor for the development of post-traumatic epilepsy, but few data exist to support or refute this statement. We analysed the incidence and prevalence of epilepsy in a large cohort of post-concussion patients. Design Retrospective cohort study. Setting Academic tertiary care centre. Participants 330 consecutive post-concussion patients followed by one concussion specialist (CHT). Exclusion criteria: abnormal brain CT/MRI, GCS ≤ 12 >1 hr post-injury, hospitalisation>48 hrs. Mean number of concussions/patient 3.3 (±2.5), mean age at first clinic visit 28 years (±14.7), mean follow-up after first concussion 7.6 years (±10.8). Assessment of risk factor Independent variable, concussion. Outcome measures Epilepsy incidence (dependent variable); prevalence. Main results Eight patients had medical record documentation of seizures or convulsions or epilepsy. Upon detailed review by an epilepsy specialist (RW) none met criteria for a definite diagnosis of epilepsy: 4 had episodic symptoms incompatible with epileptic seizures (multifocal paraesthesiae, multimodality hallucinations, classic migraine) and normal EEG/MRI investigations; 4 had clear histories of syncopal (n=2) or concussive (n=2) convulsions. Compared to epilepsy prevalence (6.6/1000 individuals) and annual incidence (0.5/1000 individuals) in the general population, there was no difference in this post-concussion cohort (Chi-square=0.218, d.f.1, corr.cont., p=0.64). Conclusions In this large cohort of post-concussion patients we found no evidence of an increased incidence of epilepsy, and the prevalence of epilepsy was lower than in the general population. Concussion is not a significant risk factor for the development of post-traumatic epilepsy, at least in the first decade post-injury. Competing interests None.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.304 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Sports Medicine→Same topicTraumatic Brain Injury Research→French-language works237,207→