Original Research: Clinical Significance of a Unique Pediatric EEG Configuration: Bi-Frontal Spikes With Simultaneous Bi-Occipital Positivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Frontal-predominant epileptiform discharges (EDs) include generalized spike-wave (GSW) and frontal spikes (FS). However, negative bi-frontal ED with simultaneous occipital positivity (BFOD) are rare, leading to questions regarding physiological generators. Methods: To determine the clinical significance of BFOD, electroclinical features of children with BFOD (n = 40) were compared to control patients with GSW (n = 102) and FS (n = 100). Results: Results are presented in the following order: BFOD, GSW, and FS. Epilepsy was prevalent among the groups: 95.0%, 90.2%, and 77.0%, respectively. The median age of seizure-onset did not significantly differ between groups: 3.00, 4.00, and 2.25 years, respectively. Regarding EEG background features, the BFOD group had more disorganized sleep architecture than other groups, P < .005. There was a significant difference in the proportion of developmental delay (DD) between the groups ( P < .005). BFOD had much higher odds of DD compared to GSW and FS groups: odds ratio (OR) (confidence interval [CI]) 19.44 [5.64, 64.05] and 3.98 [1.16, 13.34]. Furthermore, BFOD had much higher odds of severe DD compared to GSW and FS groups: 9.60 [2.75, 33.45] and 2.73 [1.03, 7.27]. A Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS) score of ≥ 4 was more prevalent in BFOD (22.5%), than GSW (0%) and FS groups (9%). On neuroimaging, BFOD had more structural ( P < .005) and multilobar structural ( P < .05) abnormalities than control groups. Conclusion: Children with BFOD had particularly severe significant DD, considerable motor deficit (GMFCS ≥ 4), and brain structural abnormalities, often multilobar. This suggests BFOD is a marker of severe underlying brain dysfunction and not benign when encountered on routine EEG review.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".