MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4223977890 · doi:10.1101/2022.04.11.22273714

Heterogeneity of resting-state EEG features in juvenile myoclonic epilepsy and controls

2022· preprint· en· W4223977890 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Amy Shakeshaft, Petroula Laiou, Eugenio Abela, Ioannis Stavropoulos, Mark P. Richardson, Deb K. Pal

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilMedical Research Council Centre for Neurodevelopmental DisordersEuropean CommissionKing's College LondonInnovative Medicines InitiativeCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchEuropean Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and AssociationsAutism SpeaksSimons Foundation Autism Research InitiativeMedical Research CouncilSouth London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust
KeywordsJuvenile myoclonic epilepsyElectroencephalographyIctalEpilepsyResting state fMRIPsychologyIdiopathic generalized epilepsyAudiologyGeneralized epilepsyNeuroscienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Abnormal EEG features are a hallmark of epilepsy, and abnormal frequency and network features are apparent in EEGs from people with idiopathic generalised epilepsy in both ictal and interictal states. Here, we characterise differences in the resting-state EEG of individuals with juvenile myoclonic epilepsy (JME) and assess factors influencing the heterogeneity of these EEG features. We collected EEG data from 147 participants with JME through the Biology of Juvenile Myoclonic Epilepsy (BIOJUME) study. 95 control EEGs were acquired from two independent studies (Chowdhury et al. (2014) and EU-AIMS Longitudinal European Autism Project). We extracted frequency and functional network-based features from 10-20s epochs of resting-state EEG, including relative power spectral density (PSD), peak alpha frequency, network topology measures and Brain Network Ictogenicity (BNI): a computational measure of the propensity of networks to generate seizure dynamics. The influence of covariates such as age, sex, antiseizure medication, EEG time and epoch length were investigated for each EEG feature prior to testing for differences between JME and control EEGs using univariate, multivariable and receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis. Additionally, associations of clinical phenotypes (seizure type, seizure control) with EEG features were investigated in the JME cohort. P-values were corrected for multiple comparisons. Univariate analysis showed significant differences in PSD in delta (2-5Hz) (p=0.0007, hedges’ g=0.55) and low-alpha (6-9Hz) (p=2.9×10 -8 , g=0.80) frequency bands, peak alpha frequency (p=0.000007, g=0.66), functional network mean degree (p=0.0006, g=0.48) and BNI (p=0.00006, g=0.56) between JME and controls. Since age (p=0.009) and epoch length (p=1.7×10 -8 ) differed between the two groups and were potential confounders, we controlled for these covariates in multivariable analysis where disparities in EEG features between JME and controls remained. ROC analysis showed low-alpha PSD was optimal at distinguishing JME from controls, with an area under the curve of 0.72. Lower average normalized clustering coefficient and shorter average normalized path length were associated with poorer seizure control in JME patients. To conclude, individuals with JME have increased power of neural oscillatory activity at low-alpha frequencies, along with increased BNI compared to controls, supporting evidence from studies in other epilepsies with considerable external validity. In addition, the impact of confounders on different frequency-based and network-based EEG features observed in this study highlights the need for careful consideration and control of these factors in future EEG research in IGE particularly for their use as biomarkers.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicEpilepsy research and treatment→French-language works237,207→