Interictal Activity Is Associated With Slower Binocular Rivalry in Idiopathic Generalized Epilepsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Perceptual alternations evoked by binocular rivalry (BR) reflect cortical dynamics strongly dependent on the excitatory–inhibitory balance, suggesting potential utility as a biomarker for epileptogenesis. Therefore, we investigated the characteristics of BR in patients with idiopathic generalized epilepsy (IGE) and potential associations with clinical variables. Methods: Sixty-two healthy controls (HCs) and 94 IGE patients completed BR task. Perceptual alternation rates were compared between HC and IGE groups as well as among the HC group and IGE patients stratified according to the presence or absence of interictal activity on the ambulatory electroencephalogram (EEG), termed the abnormal ambulatory EEG group (AB-AEEG, n = 64) and normal ambulatory EEG group (N-AEEG, n = 30), respectively. Results: The IGE patients demonstrated a slower rate of BR perceptual alternation than HC subjects (t = −4.364, p < 0.001). The alternation rate also differed among the HC, AB-AEEG, and N-AEEG groups (F = 44.962, df = 2, p < 0.001), and post hoc comparisons indicated a significantly slower alternation rate in the AB-AEEG group compared with the N-AEEG and HC groups (0.28 vs. 0.46, and 0.43 Hz). Stepwise linear regression revealed positive correlations between the BR alternation rate and both the ambulatory EEG status (β, 0.173; standard error, 0.022 p < 0.001) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment score (β, 0.013; standard error, 0.004; p = 0.003). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis of the BR alternation rate distinguished AB-AEEG from N-AEEG subjects with 90.00% sensitivity and 76.90% specificity (area under the curve = 0.881; 95% confidence interval = 0.801– 0.961, cut-off = 0.319). Alternatively, Montreal Cognitive Assessment score did not accurately distinguish AB-AEEG from N-AEEG subjects and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve combining the BR alternation rate and Montreal Cognitive Assessment score was not markedly larger than that of the BR alternation rate alone (0.894, 95% confidence interval = 0.822–0.966, p < 0.001). K-fold cross-validation was used to evaluate the predictive performance of BR alternation rate, MoCA score, and the combination of both, which yielded average AUC values of 0.870, 0.584 and 0.847, average sensitivity values of 89.36, 92.73, and 91.28%, and average specificity values of 62.25, 13.42, and 61.78%, respectively. The number of interictal epileptiform discharges was significantly correlated with the alternation rate in IGE patients (r = 0.296, p = 0.018). A forward stepwise linear regression model identified the number of interictal epileptiform discharges (β, 0.001; standard error, 0.001; p = 0.025) as an independent factor associated with BR alternation rate in these patients. Conclusion: These results suggest that interictal epileptiform discharges are associated with disruptions in perceptual awareness, and that the BR may be a useful auxiliary behavioral task to diagnosis and dynamically monitor IGE patients with interictal discharge.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".