MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969250937 · doi:10.3389/fnins.2019.00947

Novel Optogenetic Approaches in Epilepsy Research

2019· review· en· W2969250937 on OpenAlexafffund
Elvis Cela, P. Jesper Sjöström

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neuroscience · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicPhotoreceptor and optogenetics research
Canadian institutionsMontreal General HospitalMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsEpileptogenesisEpilepsyOptogeneticsNeurosciencePopulationAnimal modelMedicinePsychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Epilepsy is a major neurological disorder characterized by repeated seizures afflicting 1% of the global population. The emergence of seizures is associated with several comorbidities and severely decreases the quality of life of patients. Unfortunately, around 30% of patients do not respond to first-line treatment using anti-seizure drugs (ASDs). Furthermore, it is still unclear how seizures arise in the healthy brain. Therefore, it is critical to have well developed models where a causal understanding of epilepsy can be investigated. While the development of seizures has been studied in several animal models, using chemical or electrical induction, deciphering the results of such studies has been difficult due to the uncertainty of the cell population being targeted as well as potential confounds such as brain damage from the procedure itself. Here we describe novel approaches using combinations of optical and genetic methods for studying epileptogenesis. These approaches can circumvent some shortcomings associated with the classical animal models and may thus increase the likelihood of developing new treatment options.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.566
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.106 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations40
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeuroscienceSame topicPhotoreceptor and optogenetics researchFrench-language works237,207