Clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with post-stroke epilepsy: protocol for an individual patient data meta-analysis from the International Post-stroke Epilepsy Research Repository (IPSERR)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Despite significant advances in managing acute stroke and reducing stroke mortality, preventing complications like post-stroke epilepsy (PSE) has seen limited progress. PSE research has been scattered worldwide with varying methodologies and data reporting. To address this, we established the International Post-stroke Epilepsy Research Consortium (IPSERC) to integrate global PSE research efforts. This protocol outlines an individual patient data meta-analysis (IPD-MA) to determine outcomes in patients with post-stroke seizures (PSS) and develop/validate PSE prediction models, comparing them with existing models. This protocol informs about creating the International Post-stroke Epilepsy Research Repository (IPSERR) to support future collaborative research. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We utilised a comprehensive search strategy and searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases until 30 January 2023. We extracted observational studies of stroke patients aged ≥18 years, presenting early or late PSS with data on patient outcome measures, and conducted the risk of bias assessment. We did not apply any restriction based on the date or language of publication. We will invite these study authors and the IPSERC collaborators to contribute IPD to IPSERR. We will review the IPD lodged within IPSERR to identify patients who developed epileptic seizures and those who did not. We will merge the IPD files of individual data and standardise the variables where possible for consistency. We will conduct an IPD-MA to estimate the prognostic value of clinical characteristics in predicting PSE. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required for this study. The results will be published in peer-reviewed journals. This study will contribute to IPSERR, which will be available to researchers for future PSE research projects. It will also serve as a platform to anchor future clinical trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT06108102.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.079 | 0.148 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.023 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.057 | 0.006 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".