Investigating current clinical opinions in stereoelectroencephalography‐informed epilepsy surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Stereoelectroencephalography (SEEG) is increasingly utilized worldwide in epilepsy surgery planning. International guidelines for SEEG terminology and interpretation are yet to be proposed. There are worldwide differences in SEEG definitions, application of features in epilepsy surgery planning, and interpretation of surgical outcomes. This hinders the clinical interpretation of SEEG findings and collaborative research. We aimed to assess the global perspectives on SEEG terminology, differences in the application of presurgical features, and variability in the interpretation of surgery outcome scores, and analyze how clinical expert demographics influenced these opinions. METHODS: We assessed the practices and opinions of epileptologists with specialized training in SEEG using a survey. Data were qualitatively analyzed, and subgroups were examined based on geographical regions and years of experience. Primary outcomes included opinions on SEEG terminology, features used for epilepsy surgery, and interpretation of outcome scores. Additionally, we conducted a multilevel regression and poststratification analysis to characterize the nonresponders. RESULTS: A total of 321 expert responses from 39 countries were analyzed. We observed substantial differences in terminology, practices, and use of presurgical features across geographical regions and SEEG expertise levels. The majority of experts (220, 68.5%) favored the Lüders epileptogenic zone definition. Experts were divided regarding the seizure onset zone definition, with 179 (55.8%) favoring onset alone and 135 (42.1%) supporting onset and early propagation. In terms of presurgical SEEG features, a clear preference was found for ictal features over interictal features. Seizure onset patterns were identified as the most important features by 265 experts (82.5%). We found similar trends after correcting for nonresponders using regression analysis. SIGNIFICANCE: This study underscores the need for standardized terminology, interpretation, and outcome assessment in SEEG-informed epilepsy surgery. By highlighting the diverse perspectives and practices in SEEG, this research lays a solid foundation for developing globally accepted terminology and guidelines, advancing the field toward improved communication and standardization in epilepsy surgery.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.029 | 0.085 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".