MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321327639 · doi:10.1111/dmcn.15553

Sudden unexpected death in epilepsy in children

2023· review· en· W4321327639 on OpenAlexaff
Robyn Whitney, Suvasini Sharma, Rajesh RamachandranNair

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Medicine & Child Neurology · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityMcMaster University Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpilepsyMedicineCardiorespiratory fitnessCardiorespiratory arrestPediatricsIntensive care medicinePsychiatryAnesthesiaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) is the leading cause of epilepsy-related mortality in children and adults living with epilepsy. The incidence of SUDEP is comparable in both children and adults; it is approximately 1.2 per 1000 person years. The pathophysiology of SUDEP is not well understood but may involve mechanisms such as cerebral shutdown, autonomic dysfunction, altered brainstem function, and cardiorespiratory demise. Risk factors for SUDEP include the presence of generalized tonic-clonic seizures, nocturnal seizures, possible genetic predisposition, and non-adherence to antiseizure medications. Pediatric-specific risk factors are not fully elucidated. Despite recommendations from consensus guidelines, many clinicians still do not follow the practice of counseling their patients about SUDEP. SUDEP prevention has been an area of important research focus and includes several strategies, such as obtaining seizure control, optimizing treatment regimens, nocturnal supervision, and seizure detection devices. This review discusses what is currently known about SUDEP risk factors and reviews current and future preventive strategies for SUDEP.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations38
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental Medicine & Child NeurologySame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207