MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391664472 · doi:10.1093/brain/awae037

Spike ripples localize the epileptogenic zone best: an international intracranial study

2024· article· en· W4391664472 on OpenAlexaff
Wen Shi, Dana Shaw, Katherine G. Walsh, Xue Han, Uri T. Eden, R. Mark Richardson, S. Gliske, Julia Jacobs, Benjamin H. Brinkmann, Gregory A. Worrell, William C. Stacey, Birgit Frauscher, John Thomas, Mark Kramer, Catherine J. Chu

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and HospitalAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsSpike (software development)NeurosciencePsychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We evaluated whether spike ripples, the combination of epileptiform spikes and ripples, provide a reliable and improved biomarker for the epileptogenic zone compared with other leading interictal biomarkers in a multicentre, international study. We first validated an automated spike ripple detector on intracranial EEG recordings. We then applied this detector to subjects from four centres who subsequently underwent surgical resection with known 1-year outcomes. We evaluated the spike ripple rate in subjects cured after resection [International League Against Epilepsy Class 1 outcome (ILAE 1)] and those with persistent seizures (ILAE 2-6) across sites and recording types. We also evaluated available interictal biomarkers: spike, spike-gamma, wideband high frequency oscillation (HFO, 80-500 Hz), ripple (80-250 Hz) and fast ripple (250-500 Hz) rates using previously validated automated detectors. The proportion of resected events was computed and compared across subject outcomes and biomarkers. Overall, 109 subjects were included. Most spike ripples were removed in subjects with ILAE 1 outcome (P < 0.001), and this was qualitatively observed across all sites and for depth and subdural electrodes (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). Among ILAE 1 subjects, the mean spike ripple rate was higher in the resected volume (0.66/min) than in the non-removed tissue (0.08/min, P < 0.001). A higher proportion of spike ripples were removed in subjects with ILAE 1 outcomes compared with ILAE 2-6 outcomes (P = 0.06). Among ILAE 1 subjects, the proportion of spike ripples removed was higher than the proportion of spikes (P < 0.001), spike-gamma (P < 0.001), wideband HFOs (P < 0.001), ripples (P = 0.009) and fast ripples (P = 0.009) removed. At the individual level, more subjects with ILAE 1 outcomes had the majority of spike ripples removed (79%, 38/48) than spikes (69%, P = 0.12), spike-gamma (69%, P = 0.12), wideband HFOs (63%, P = 0.03), ripples (45%, P = 0.01) or fast ripples (36%, P < 0.001) removed. Thus, in this large, multicentre cohort, when surgical resection was successful, the majority of spike ripples were removed. Furthermore, automatically detected spike ripples localize the epileptogenic tissue better than spikes, spike-gamma, wideband HFOs, ripples and fast ripples.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.332 · 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

Citations66
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrainSame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207