MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2888566002 · doi:10.1177/1098612x18791873

Recurrent seizures in cats: Diagnostic approach – when is it idiopathic epilepsy?

2018· article· en· W2888566002 on OpenAlexaff
Michal Hazenfratz, Susan Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Feline Medicine and Surgery · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCATSMedicineEpilepsySeizure DisordersPopulationTerminologyPediatricsIntensive care medicinePsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Practical relevance: Seizures are one of the most common neurologic problems recognized in cats, affecting approximately 1-3% of the general population. Treatment options and prognosis are closely related to the underlying cause, so it is important that veterinarians are familiar with the diagnostic approach to cats with seizures and options for medical management. Series outline: This is the first of a two-part article series that reviews the diagnosis and treatment of seizures in cats. Part 1 outlines the classification and terminology used to describe epilepsy and epileptic seizures in cats, and discusses some of the most common and unique causes of recurrent seizures in cats. The diagnostic approach to cats with recurrent seizures is addressed, as are criteria for the diagnosis of idiopathic epilepsy. AUDIENCE: This review of recurrent seizures in cats is intended for all veterinarians who are facing the challenges of seizure diagnosis and management in the feline patient. Evidence base: Recommendations for diagnosis and management of feline seizure disorders have historically been extrapolated from the canine and human literature. The information and guidance provided in this two-part series is based on a review of the recent published literature addressing seizure disorders and antiepileptic treatment in cats, as well as the authors' clinical experience.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.184
Threshold uncertainty score0.530

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations21
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Feline Medicine and SurgerySame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207