MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396532549 · doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2024.04.016

Systematic review of seizure-onset patterns in stereo-electroencephalography: Current state and future directions

2024· article· en· W4396532549 on OpenAlexafffund
Chifaou Abdallah, Daniel Mansilla, Erica Minato, Christophe Grova, Sándor Beniczky, Birgit Frauscher

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Neurophysiology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsElectroencephalographyCurrent (fluid)PsychologyEpilepsyAudiologyNeuroscienceMedicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Increasing evidence suggests that the seizure-onset pattern (SOP) in stereo-electroencephalography (SEEG) is important for localizing the "true" seizure onset. Specifically, SOPs with low-voltage fast activity (LVFA) are associated with seizure-free outcome (Engel I). However, several classifications and various terms corresponding to the same pattern have been reported, challenging its use in clinical practice. METHOD: Following the Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline, we performed a systematic review of studies describing SOPs along with accompanying figures depicting the reported SOP in SEEG. RESULTS: Of 1799 studies, 22 met the selection criteria. Among the various SOPs, we observed that the terminology for low frequency periodic spikes exhibited the most variability, whereas LVFA is the most frequently used term of this pattern. Some SOP terms were inconsistent with standard EEG terminology. Finally, there was a significant but weak association between presence of LVFA and seizure-free outcome. CONCLUSION: Divergent terms were used to describe the same SOPs and some of these terms showed inconsistencies with the standard EEG terminology. Additionally, our results confirmed the link between patterns with LVFA and seizure-free outcomes. However, this association was not strong. SIGNIFICANCE: These results underline the need for standardization of SEEG terminology.

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)0.028
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.104
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0280.104
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.009
Bibliometrics0.0120.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.362 · 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 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

Citations22
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical NeurophysiologySame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207