MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006631369 · doi:10.14740/jnr.v10i1.563

The Trend of In-Hospital Epilepsy and Its Mortality in the USA: A National Analysis During 1997 - 2014

2020· article· en· W3006631369 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jared Alexander Stowers, Neda Ahmadi, Ali Seifi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurology Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEpilepsyCohortHealthcare Cost and Utilization ProjectRetrospective cohort studyPopulationCohort studyTrend analysisEmergency medicineMortality rateHospital dischargeDemographyHealth carePediatricsEnvironmental healthInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: This study focuses on the trend of prevalence of epilepsy hospital discharges in the USA, and the aim is to find any change in the trend of prevalence of epilepsy in the USA and its in-hospital mortality. Methods: A retrospective cohort study used the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) national database to analyze trends of epilepsy outcomes between 1997 and 2014. Results: A total of 4,594,213 total epilepsy discharges were documented between 1997 and 2014 in the HCUP database. The prevalence of annual discharges increased significantly during the study period from 209,002 discharges in 1997 to 280,255 in 2014 (P < 0.0001). There were a total of 35,643 in-hospital deaths due to epilepsy within the cohort during the study period. Mortality of epilepsy decreased across the entire cohort and between genders. In 1997, there were 2,256 documented in-hospital deaths, while 1,759 were recorded in 2014 (P = 0.00157). Conclusions: Our data showed that the prevalence of hospital epilepsy discharges is increasing in recent years; however, the in-hospital mortality is decreasing. The increase in the prevalence could be due to better detection or increased population, while the improved mortality could be due to better available treatments in recent years. Focusing on designing more accurate and affordable screening tools, as well as targeting further pharmacology-based treatments are an area of research that requires further investigation. J Neurol Res. 2020;10(1):3-6 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jnr563

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)0.001
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 score0.486

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.326 · 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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neurology ResearchSame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207