MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3171361453 · doi:10.1016/j.yebeh.2021.108047

Resting-state EEG for the diagnosis of idiopathic epilepsy and psychogenic nonepileptic seizures: A systematic review

2021· review· en· W3171361453 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Irene Faiman, Stuart D.W. Smith, John Hodsoll, Allan H. Young, Paul Shotbolt

Bibliographic record

VenueEpilepsy & Behavior · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthMedical Research CouncilRoyal College of PhysiciansNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchKing's College LondonKing’s College LondonPsychiatry Research TrustCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchBritish Medical AssociationWellcome TrustStanley Medical Research InstituteMichael Smith Health Research BCSouth London and Maudsley NHS Foundation TrustNational Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and Depression
KeywordsPsychogenic diseaseEpilepsyElectroencephalographyIctalNeurophysiologyPsychologyNeuroscienceIdiopathic generalized epilepsyAudiologyResting state fMRIMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantitative markers extracted from resting-state electroencephalogram (EEG) reveal subtle neurophysiological dynamics which may provide useful information to support the diagnosis of seizure disorders. We performed a systematic review to summarize evidence on markers extracted from interictal, visually normal resting-state EEG in adults with idiopathic epilepsy or psychogenic nonepileptic seizures (PNES). Studies were selected from 5 databases and evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2. 26 studies were identified, 19 focusing on people with epilepsy, 6 on people with PNES, and one comparing epilepsy and PNES directly. Results suggest that oscillations along the theta frequency (4-8 Hz) may have a relevant role in idiopathic epilepsy, whereas in PNES there was no evident trend. However, studies were subject to a number of methodological limitations potentially introducing bias. There was often a lack of appropriate reporting and high heterogeneity. Results were not appropriate for quantitative synthesis. We identify and discuss the challenges that must be addressed for valid resting-state EEG markers of epilepsy and PNES to be developed.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.006
Bibliometrics0.0070.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations49
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpilepsy & BehaviorSame topicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207