Diagnostic Utility of Wireless Video-Electroencephalography in Unsedated Dogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Poor agreement between observers on whether an unusual event is a seizure drives the need for a specific diagnostic tool provided by video-electroencephalography (video-EEG) in human pediatric epileptology. OBJECTIVE: That successful classification of events would be positively associated with increasing EEG recording length and higher event frequency reported before video-EEG evaluation; that a novel wireless video-EEG technique would clarify whether unusual behavioral events were seizures in unsedated dogs. ANIMALS: Eighty-one client-owned dogs of various breeds undergoing investigation of unusual behavioral events at 4 institutions. METHODS: Retrospective case series: evaluation of wireless video-EEG recordings in unsedated dogs performed at 4 institutions. RESULTS: Electroencephalography achieved/excluded diagnosis of epilepsy in 58 dogs (72%); 25 dogs confirmed with epileptic seizures based on ictal/interictal epileptiform discharges, and 33 dogs with no EEG abnormalities associated with their target events. As reported frequency of the target events decreased (annually, monthly, weekly, daily, hourly, minutes, seconds), EEG was less likely to achieve diagnosis (P < 0.001). Every increase in event frequency increased the odds of achieving diagnosis by 2.315 (95% confidence interval: 1.36-4.34). EEG recording length (mean = 3.69 hours, range: 0.17-22.5) was not associated (P = 0.2) with the likelihood of achieving a diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: Wireless video-EEG in unsedated dogs had a high success for diagnosis of unusual behavioral events. This technique offered a reliable clinical tool to investigate the epileptic origin of behavioral events in dogs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".