MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3083128396 · doi:10.1212/wnl.0000000000010609

Epilepsy risk among survivors of intensive care unit hospitalization for sepsis

2020· article· en· W3083128396 on OpenAlexaffabout
Tresah C. Antaya, Britney Allen, Lucie Richard, Salimah Z. Shariff, Gustavo Saposnik, Jorge G. Burneo

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSepsisHazard ratioIntensive care unitEpilepsyProportional hazards modelKidney diseasePopulationRisk factorRetrospective cohort studyCohort studyInternal medicineConfidence intervalIntensive care medicinePsychiatryEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether survivors of intensive care unit (ICU) hospitalizations with sepsis experience higher epilepsy risk than survivors of ICU hospitalizations without sepsis, and to identify sepsis survivors at highest risk. METHODS: We used linked, administrative health care databases to conduct a population-based, retrospective matched cohort study of adult Ontario residents discharged from an ICU between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2015, identified using the Discharge Abstract Database. We used propensity scores to match patients who experienced sepsis during their index ICU hospitalization with up to 4 patients who did not experience sepsis. We applied marginal Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate the risk of epilepsy within 2 years following the index ICU hospitalization. Among sepsis survivors, Cox proportional hazards regression was used to identify factors associated with epilepsy. RESULTS: A total of 143,892 patients were included, 32,252 (22.4%) of whom were exposed. Sepsis survivors were at significantly higher epilepsy risk (hazard ratio [HR] 1.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.15-1.80). The risk of epilepsy marginally decreased with increasing age (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.96-0.99); patients with chronic kidney disease (HR 2.25, 95% CI 1.48-3.43) were at highest risk. CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world analysis, sepsis survivors, particularly those who are younger and have chronic kidney disease, are at significantly higher epilepsy risk. These findings indicate that sepsis may be an unrecognized epilepsy risk factor.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurologySame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207