MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392520195 · doi:10.1002/epi4.12925

Surveying neurologist perspectives and knowledge of epilepsy surgery to identify barriers to surgery referral

2024· article· en· W4392520195 on OpenAlex
Namal Seneviratne, Sophey Ho, Daniel J. Correa

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEpilepsia Open · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReferralEpilepsy surgeryEpilepsyMedicineGeneral surgeryMedical emergencyFamily medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Epilepsy surgery is an effective means of treating medically refractory epilepsy (MRE), but it remains underused. We aimed to analyze the perspectives and knowledge of referring neurologists in the New York metropolitan area, who serve a large epilepsy population. METHODS: We adapted a previous Canadian survey by Roberts et al. (2015), adding questions regarding demographic descriptors, insurance coverage, training and practice details, and perceived social barriers for patients. We surveyed neurologists directly affiliated with Montefiore Medical Center and those referring to Montefiore's Comprehensive Epilepsy Center. Participants had 10 weeks to fill out an online Qualtrics survey with weekly reminders. RESULTS: Of 117 neurologists contacted, 51 eligible neurologists completed the survey (63.8% Montefiore, 35.0% referring group). A high proportion of the results were from epilepsy-trained individuals (41.2%) and neurologists who graduated residency ≤19 years ago (80.4%). 80.4% of respondents felt that epilepsy surgery is safe, but only 56.9% would refer a patient for surgical workup after two failed trials of anti-seizure medications. Epileptologists and providers with a larger volume of epilepsy patients and electroencephalogram readings had better knowledge of the epilepsy surgery workup guidelines. When asked to rank social barriers to patients receiving surgery, participants were most concerned about lack of social support, financial insecurity, and a patient's dual role as a caregiver. SIGNIFICANCE: Our study suggests continued reluctance of neurologists regarding epilepsy surgery, and deficiencies in the knowledge and adherence to the recommended guidelines. In the context of prior studies, these results showed improved understanding of the definition of MRE (80.4%) and an increased likelihood to refer eligible patients as early as possible (78.4%) in line with current consensus recommendations. The finding that epilepsy-trained and more epilepsy/electroencephalogram-facing neurologists showed better understanding of the guidelines suggests that increased education efforts should be targeted at non-epileptologists. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Our study asked New York City doctors about their approach to epilepsy surgery. Many do not consider it as early as they could in treatment plans. The doctors with extra epilepsy training were better at knowing when to consider surgery.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.119
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.322 · 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