MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3187717225 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v13n9p71

Electroencephalography: Experience at Abakaliki Nigeria

2021· article· en· W3187717225 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chukwuemeka O Eze, Olaronke F. Afolabi, Emeka Ogah Onwe, Richard L. Ewah, Ugochukwu Uzodimma Nnadozie, Francis C. Okoro, Eugene C. Nzei, Chiamaka Okereke

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectroencephalographyObservational studyEpilepsyRetrospective cohort studyClinical neurophysiologyAttendanceMedicineTeaching hospitalTertiary levelAudiologyPediatricsPsychologyPsychiatrySurgeryInternal medicineFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Electroencephalography (EEG) remains the most important investigative modality in the evaluation of individuals with epilepsy and other neurological disorders. The pattern of EEG done in a tertiary hospital at Abakaliki Nigeria is not known. It is against this background that we embarked on this retrospective observational study on the EEG pattern and patient characteristics in Neurophysiology laboratory at Abakaliki Nigeria. METHOD: This is a retrospective observational hospital based study where the attendance register of the Neurophysiology laboratory was used to extract information on the demography, clinical characteristics and EEG reports of patients seen at the Laboratory from November 2018 to April 2021. RESULTS: A total of 125 (Male- 69, Female- 56) persons did EEG over the study period, and 75.2% had epileptiform waves (generalized- 16.8%, focal- 57.6%). CONCLUSION: EEG services are been utilized at Abakaliki in evaluation of seizure disorder and other paroxysmal neurological events with more prevalent focal epileptiform waves.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.361 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health Science→Same topicEpilepsy research and treatment→French-language works237,207→