MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380871903 · doi:10.1111/epi.17682

Management of epilepsy with eyelid myoclonia: Results of an international expert consensus panel

2023· article· en· W4380871903 on OpenAlexaff
Kelsey M. Smith, Elaine Wirrell, Danielle M. Andrade, Hyunmi Choi, Dorothée Kasteleijn‐Nolst Trenité, Hannah Jones, Kelly G. Knupp, Jon Mugar, Douglas R. Nordli, Antonella Riva, John M. Stern, Pasquale Striano, Elizabeth A. Thiele, Ifrah Zawar

Bibliographic record

VenueEpilepsia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCitizens United for Research in Epilepsy
KeywordsLamotrigineMedicineConsensus conferenceClobazamPsychiatryTopiramateLevetiracetamFamily medicineEpilepsyPediatricsIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: There are limited data about the treatment and management of epilepsy with eyelid myoclonia (EEM). The objective of this study was to determine areas of consensus among an international panel of experts for the management of EEM (formerly known as Jeavons syndrome). METHODS: An international steering committee was convened of physicians and patients/caregivers with expertise in EEM. This committee summarized the current literature and identified an international panel of experts (comprising 25 physicians and five patients/caregivers). This panel participated in a modified Delphi process, including three rounds of surveys to determine areas of consensus for the treatment, other areas of management, and prognosis for EEM. RESULTS: There was a strong consensus for valproic acid as the first-line treatment, with levetiracetam or lamotrigine as preferable alternatives for women of childbearing age. There was a moderate consensus that ethosuximide and clobazam are also efficacious. There was a strong consensus to avoid sodium channel-blocking medications, except for lamotrigine, as they may worsen seizure control. There was consensus that seizures typically persist into adulthood, with remission occurring in <50% of patients. There was less agreement about other areas of management, including dietary therapy, lens therapy, candidacy for driving, and outcome. SIGNIFICANCE: This international expert panel identified multiple areas of consensus regarding the optimal management of EEM. These areas of consensus may inform clinical practice to improve the management of EEM. In addition, multiple areas with less agreement were identified, which highlight topics for further research.

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)0.194
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.202
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.194
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1940.202
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.293 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations13
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpilepsiaSame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207