MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386089966 · doi:10.1111/epi.17757

Postoperative seizure and memory outcome of temporal lobe epilepsy with hippocampal sclerosis: A systematic review

2023· review· en· W4386089966 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yuming Li, Peiwen Liu, Qiuxing Lin, Dong Zhou, Dongmei An

Bibliographic record

VenueEpilepsia · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsHippocampal sclerosisEpilepsyTemporal lobeMesial temporal lobe epilepsyNeuroscienceHippocampal formationPsychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate postoperative seizure and memory outcomes of temporal lobe epilepsy with different hippocampal sclerosis (HS) subtypes classified by International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) Consensus Guidelines in 2013. Following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and MOOSE (Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) guidelines, we searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library from January 1, 2013 to August 6, 2023. Observational studies reporting seizure and memory outcomes among different HS subtypes were included. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa scale to assess the risk of bias and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to grade the quality of evidence. Seizure freedom and improved outcome (Engel 1 or ILAE class 1-2) ≥1 year after surgery were defined as the primary and secondary seizure outcome. A random-effects meta-analysis by DerSimonian and Laird method was performed to obtain pooled risk ratio (RRs) with 95% confidence interval (CIs). The memory impairment was narratively reviewed because of various evaluation tools. Fifteen cohort studies with 2485 patients were eligible for the meta-analysis of seizure outcome. Six cohorts with detailed information on postoperative memory outcome were included. The pooled RRs of seizure freedom, with moderate to substantial heterogeneity, were .98 (95% CI = .84-1.15) between HS type 2 and type 1, 1.11 (95% CI = .82-1.52) between type 3 and type 1, and .80 (95% CI = .62-1.03) between the no-HS and HS groups. No significant difference of improved outcome was found between different subtypes (p > .05). The quality of evidence was deemed to be low to very low according to GRADE. The long-term seizure outcome (≥5 years after surgery) and memory impairment remained controversial.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations39
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpilepsiaSame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207