MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399262035 · doi:10.1002/ana.26956

Add‐On Deep Brain Stimulation versus Continued Vagus Nerve Stimulation for Childhood Epilepsy (<scp>ADVANCE</scp>): A Partially Randomized Patient Preference Trial

2024· article· en· W4399262035 on OpenAlexaff
Hrishikesh Suresh, Karim Mithani, Nebras M. Warsi, Ayako Ochi, Hiroshi Otsubo, James M. Drake, James T. Rutka, Elizabeth N. Kerr, Mary Lou Smith, Sara Breitbart, Ivanna Yau, Lyndsey McRae, Vann Chau, Shelly K. Weiss, Puneet Jain, Elizabeth Donner, Alfonso Fasano, Carolina Gorodetsky, George M. Ibrahim

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Neurology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVagus Nerve Stimulation Research
Canadian institutionsOntario Brain InstituteToronto Western HospitalHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVagus nerve stimulationStimulationRandomized controlled trialEpilepsyMedicineBrain stimulationAnesthesiaNeuroscienceDeep brain stimulationVagus nervePsychologySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Outcomes following vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) improve over years after implantation in children with drug-resistant epilepsy. The added value of deep brain stimulation (DBS) instead of continued VNS optimization is unknown. In a prospective, non-blinded, randomized patient preference trial of 18 children (aged 8-17 years) who did not respond to VNS after at least 1 year, add-on DBS resulted in greater seizure reduction compared with an additional year of VNS optimization (51.9% vs. 12.3%, p = 0.047). Add-on DBS also resulted in less bothersome seizures (p = 0.03), but no change in quality of life. DBS may be considered earlier for childhood epilepsy after non-response to VNS. ANN NEUROL 2024;96:405-411.

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)0.026
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.271
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.255 · 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.

Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations32
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of NeurologySame topicVagus Nerve Stimulation ResearchFrench-language works237,207