MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396860575 · doi:10.1111/epi.17971

Development of an International Standard Set of Outcomes and Measurement Methods for Routine Practice for Adults with Epilepsy: The International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement Consensus Recommendations

2024· review· en· W4396860575 on OpenAlexaff
James Mitchell, Frieda Sossi, Isabel Miller, Paula Blancarte Jaber, Zofia Das‐Gupta, Luz Sousa Fialho, Action Amos, Joan K. Austin, Scott Badzik, Gus A. Baker, Bruria Ben Zeev, Jeffrey Bolton, John Eric Chaplin, J. Helen Cross, Derrick Chan, Christian A. Gericke, Aatif M. Husain, Lorraine Lally, S Mbugua, Cassidy Megan, Tomás Mesa, Lilia Nuñez, Tim J. von Oertzen, Emilio Perucca, Angie Pullen, Gabriel M. Ronen, Martha Sajatovic, Mamta Bhushan Singh, Jo M. Wilmshurst, Leonie Wollscheid, Anne T. Berg

Bibliographic record

VenueEpilepsia · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityMcMaster University Medical CentreGreenfield Research (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpilepsyConsensus conferenceMEDLINEMedicineFamily medicinePsychologyGerontologyPsychiatryPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At present, there is no internationally accepted set of core outcomes or measurement methods for epilepsy clinical practice. Therefore, the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) convened an international working group of experts in epilepsy, people with epilepsy and their representatives to develop minimum sets of standardized outcomes and outcomes measurement methods for clinical practice that support patient-clinician decision-making and quality improvement. Consensus methods identified 20 core outcomes. Measurement tools were recommended based on their evidence of strong clinical measurement properties, feasibility, and cross-cultural applicability. The essential outcomes included many non-seizure outcomes: anxiety, depression, suicidality, memory and attention, sleep quality, functional status, and the social impact of epilepsy. The proposed set will facilitate the implementation of the use of patient-centered outcomes in daily practice, ensuring holistic care. They also encourage harmonization of outcome measurement, and if widely implemented should reduce the heterogeneity of outcome measurement, accelerate comparative research, and facilitate quality improvement efforts.

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)0.331
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.369
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.669
Threshold uncertainty score0.824

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.3310.369
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.014
Bibliometrics0.0140.010
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0090.007
Open science0.0090.009
Research integrity0.0060.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.232
GPT teacher head0.513
Teacher spread0.282 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designSystematic review
DomainMethods
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

Citations32
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpilepsiaSame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207