Youth Weigh In: Views on Advanced Neurotechnology for Drug-Resistant Epilepsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Epilepsy affects over 500,000 children in North America of whom 30% have drug-resistant epilepsy. Advancements with neurotechnologies show promising benefits, but the perceptions of these procedures by youth is unknown. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with 10 youth in British Columbia, Canada who underwent procedures for drug-resistant epilepsy involving different forms of neurotechnology (subdural grids, vagus nerve stimulation, responsive neurostimulation). Interviews were analyzed using the constant comparative qualitative method. RESULTS: Four major thematic categories emerged from the interviews. Treatment values, impact of the disorder, personal context, and impact of neurotechnology. CONCLUSIONS: Besides the predictable goal of seizure reduction, a desire for autonomy and the importance of trust in the medical team emerged as dominant values within the 4 thematic categories that were explicit to the use of new neurotechnologies for the management of drug-resistant epilepsy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".