MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205716545 · doi:10.47363/jnrrr/2021(3)149

The Value of Neuroimaging Studies in Pediatric Febrile Status Epilepticus

2021· article· en· W4205716545 on OpenAlexaff
Fayzieva Nozima, Mailo Janette

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurology Research Review & Reports · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsAlberta Glycomics CentreUniversity of Alberta HospitalUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatus epilepticusNeuroimagingMedicineEpilepsyIntensive care medicineFebrile seizureModalitiesPediatricsPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Febrile seizures are common in children, with incidence rates up to 14% in developing countries; febrile status epilepticus accounts for roughly 5% of all febrile seizure cases. Both status epilepticus and febrile status epilepticus are life-threatening conditions that put children at risk of future epilepsy and that require timely diagnosis and care. However, there are difficulties in applying these diagnostic concepts to daily practice due to a lack of precise definitions of the disorders. In addition, there are no unified standardized neuroimaging diagnostic guidelines, and the significance of imaging findings, when observed, remains uncertain. Even though some brain MRI features occurring in the acute phase and over long-term follow-up have been studied in both children and animals, the causal relationships between these findings and risk of adverse seizure outcomes still need clarifying. Guidelines on eligibility criteria, optimal imaging modalities and protocols, timing of imaging, and the specific brain areas and structures to be evaluated and reported, along with their specific characteristics, are urgently required. This review summarizes clinical issues related to the varied definitions of febrile status epilepticus and the data regarding the acute and chronic neuroimaging changes observed in febrile status epilepticus.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.157
GPT teacher head0.473
Teacher spread0.316 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neurology Research Review & ReportsSame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207