MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3084187007 · doi:10.33588/rn.7106.2020339

Epilepsia del lóbulo temporal plus: revisión

2020· review· es· W3084187007 on OpenAlexaff
Juan Enrique Toro Pérez, Ana Suller Martí, Manuel Herrera Aramburu, Juan S. Bottan, Jorge G. Burneo

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista de Neurología · 2020
Typereview
Languagees
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVestibular and auditory disorders
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEpilepsyPsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Temporal plus epilepsy is defined as focal epilepsy in which the primary epileptogenic area extends beyond the temporal lobe. It involves the neighboring regions such as the insula, the suprasilvian opercular cortex, the orbitofrontal cortex and the temporo-parieto-occipital junction. The objective of this review is to provide an update in temporal plus epilepsy. A previous history of brain trauma, a history of tonic clonic seizures, and previous central nervous system infection are risk factors. They likely allowed the generation of complex hippocampal and extrahypocampic neural networks. Clinical manifestations will depend on the location of the epileptogenic zone as well as the rapid propagation into temporal mesial structures. Video-electroencephalography usually shows involvement of the temporal lobe, with rapid propagation into the perisilvian, orbitofrontal or temporo-parieto-occipital regions. The magnetoelectroencephaography has lesser muscle contamination and could be considered as a biomarker of early states in the diagnosis process. Brain MRI is usually negative or shows non-specific mesial temporal abnormalities. Stereoelectroencephalography is the invasive method of choice. Temporal plus epilepsy is considered to be the most common cause of temporal lobe epilepsy surgery failure and represents up to 30%.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.777
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.005

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.267 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista de NeurologíaSame topicVestibular and auditory disordersFrench-language works237,207