MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3110479941 · doi:10.1515/revneuro-2020-0091

The subiculum and its role in focal epileptic disorders

2020· review· en· W3110479941 on OpenAlexafffund
Maxime Lévesque, Massimo Avoli

Bibliographic record

VenueReviews in the Neurosciences · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchSavoy Foundation
KeywordsSubiculumNeuroscienceMesial temporal lobe epilepsyHippocampal formationHippocampusEpilepsyTemporal lobePsychologyPathologicalMedicinePathologyDentate gyrus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The subicular complex (hereafter referred as subiculum), which is reciprocally connected with the hippocampus and rhinal cortices, exerts a major control on hippocampal outputs. Over the last three decades, several studies have revealed that the subiculum plays a pivotal role in learning and memory but also in pathological conditions such as mesial temporal lobe epilepsy (MTLE). Indeed, subicular networks actively contribute to seizure generation and this structure is relatively spared from the cell loss encountered in this focal epileptic disorder. In this review, we will address: (i) the functional properties of subicular principal cells under normal and pathological conditions; (ii) the subiculum role in sustaining seizures in in vivo models of MTLE and in in vitro models of epileptiform synchronization; (iii) its presumptive role in human MTLE; and (iv) evidence underscoring the relationship between subiculum and antiepileptic drug effects. The studies reviewed here reinforce the view that the subiculum represents a limbic area with relevant, as yet unexplored, roles in focal 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 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)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.291 · 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.

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

Citations20
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReviews in the NeurosciencesSame topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchFrench-language works237,207