MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398793705 · doi:10.1007/s10072-024-07606-5

The assessment of the impact of antiepileptic drugs on cognitive functions via N-200/P-300 potentials and neuropsychological measures

2024· article· en· W4398793705 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Javid Shafiyev, Ömer Karadaş

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurological Sciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuropsychologyNeurologyNeuroradiologyNeurosurgeryCognitionNeuropsychological assessmentMedicinePsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The effects of antiseizure medications (ASMs) on cognitive functions have not been fully elucidated. The primary aim of this study was to demonstrate potential changes in cognitive functions in patients diagnosed with epilepsy from both neuropsychological and electrophysiological perspectives. Our secondary objective was to assess the effects of administered ASM on cognitive functions by categorizing patients into different monotherapy and polytherapy groups. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A single-center, prospective patient registry study was conducted between May 2022 and June 2023. The inclusion criteria included epilepsy patients aged 18 to 50 years who were receiving ASM) treatment, either as inpatients or outpatients, and who did not have any syndromic diagnosis that may lead to cognitive disfunciton (such as primary progressive myoclonic epilepsies, Down syndrome and so on), and did not diagnosed previously or during examination that could affect dementia or cognitive functions. Patients who were scheduled to initiate new ASM treatment were evaluated using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) scale and Event-Related Potentials (ERP) assessment both before commencing treatment and three months thereafter. RESULTS: A total of 320 participants were included in the study; 20 healthy controls and 300 epilepsy patients were included. Statistically significant differences were observed between the healthy control group and the epilepsy group in terms of average Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) scores and event-related potentials (ERPs) (n200, p300 latencies, n2p3 amplitudes) (p<0.05). Similarly, statistically significant differences were observed between the monotherapy and polytherapy groups in terms of average MoCA and ERP scores (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated the detrimental effects of certain ASMs, particularly topiramate and carbamazepine, on cognitive functions. Furthermore, the negative impact on cognitive performance became more pronounced with an increasing number of concurrently used ASMs (polytherapy), with topiramate showing notable effects.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.613

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.352 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations15
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurological SciencesSame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207