MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885247192 · doi:10.1212/wnl.0000000000006158

Removing high-frequency oscillations

2018· article· en· W2885247192 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersUniversity of California, Los AngelesNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeEisaiBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftEuropean Commission
KeywordsIctalElectrocorticographyEpilepsyEpilepsy surgeryElectroencephalographyMedicineSurgeryAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the use of interictal high-frequency oscillations (HFOs) in epilepsy surgery for prediction of postsurgical seizure outcome in a prospective multicenter trial. METHODS: We hypothesized that a seizure-free outcome could be expected in patients in whom the surgical planning included the majority of HFO-generating brain tissue while a poor seizure outcome could be expected in patients in whom only a few such areas were planned to be resected. Fifty-two patients were included from 3 tertiary epilepsy centers during a 1-year period. Ripples (80-250 Hz) and fast ripples (250-500 Hz) were automatically detected during slow-wave sleep with chronic intracranial EEG in 2 centers and acute intraoperative electrocorticography in 1 patient. RESULTS: There was a correlation between the removal of HFO-generating regions and seizure-free outcome at the group level for all patients. No correlation was found, however, for the center-specific analysis, and an individual prognostication of seizure outcome was true in only 36 patients (67%). Moreover, some patients became seizure-free without removal of the majority of HFO-generating tissue. The investigation of influencing factors, including comparisons of visual and automatic analysis, using a threshold analysis for areas with high HFO activity, and excluding contacts bordering the resection, did not result in improved prognostication. CONCLUSIONS: On an individual patient level, a prediction of outcome was not possible in all patients. This may be due to the analysis techniques used. Alternatively, HFOs may be less specific for epileptic tissue than earlier studies have indicated.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.949

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.285 · 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