MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4313584275 · doi:10.3389/fneur.2022.1048629

Epileptic high-frequency oscillations occur in neonates with a high risk for seizures

2023· article· en· W4313584275 on OpenAlexaff
N Kuhnke, Courtney J. Wusthoff, Eroshini Swarnalingam, Mina Yanoussi, Julia Jacobs

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neurology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal and fetal brain pathology
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectroencephalographyEpilepsyNeuroscienceMedicinePsychologyAudiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Scalp high-frequency oscillations (HFOs, 80-250 Hz) are increasingly recognized as EEG markers of epileptic brain activity. It is, however, unclear what level of brain maturity is necessary to generate these oscillations. Many studies have reported the occurrence of scalp HFOs in children with a correlation between treatment success of epileptic seizures and the reduction of HFOs. More recent studies describe the reliable detection of HFOs on scalp EEG during the neonatal period. Methods: In the present study, continuous EEGs of 38 neonates at risk for seizures were analyzed visually for the scalp HFOs using 30 min of quiet sleep EEG. EEGs of 14 patients were of acceptable quality to analyze HFOs. Results: = 0.005). Discussion: Neonatal brains are capable of generating HFOs. HFO could be a viable biomarker for neonates at risk of developing seizures. Our preliminary data suggest that HFOs mainly occur in those neonates who have altered background activity. Larger data sets are needed to conclude whether HFO occurrence is linked to seizure generation and whether this might predict the development of epilepsy.

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)0.002
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Neurology→Same topicNeonatal and fetal brain pathology→French-language works237,207→