MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205783562 · doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2021.12.017

High-frequency oscillations in scalp EEG: A systematic review of methodological choices and clinical findings

2022· review· en· W4205783562 on OpenAlexaff
Lotte Noorlag, Nicole van Klink, Katsuhiro Kobayashi, Jean Gotman, Kees P. J. Braun, Maeike Zijlmans

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Neurophysiology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersH2020 European Research CouncilEuropean Research CouncilWilhelmina Kinderziekenhuis
KeywordsScalpElectroencephalographyPathologicalIctalEpilepsyCognitionNeuroscienceMedicineCochrane LibraryPsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMeta-analysisPathologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Pathological high-frequency oscillations (HFOs) in intracranial EEG are promising biomarkers of epileptogenic tissue, and their physiological counterparts play a role in sensorimotor and cognitive function. HFOs have also been found in scalp EEG, but an overview of all studies is lacking. In this systematic review, we assessed the methodology to detect scalp HFOs and their clinical potential. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library for studies on HFOs in scalp EEG, and extracted methodological and clinical data. RESULTS: We included 60 studies with data from 1149 unique individuals. Two-thirds of studies analyzed HFOs visually in the time or time-frequency domain, and one-third automatically with visual validation. Most studies evaluated interictal ripples during sleep in children. Pathological HFOs were overall better than spikes in localizing the epileptogenic zone and predicting outcome, correlated negatively with cognition and positively with disease activity and severity, and decreased after medical and surgical treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The methodologies of the 60 studies were heterogeneous, but pathological scalp HFOs were clinically valuable as biomarkers in various situations, particularly in children with epilepsy. SIGNIFICANCE: This systematic review gives an extensive overview of methodological and clinical data on scalp HFOs, establishing their clinical potential and discussing their limitations.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.371
GPT teacher head0.542
Teacher spread0.170 · 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 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

Citations53
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical NeurophysiologySame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207