MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403854868 · doi:10.1101/2024.10.29.620811

Ictal-Related Chirp as a Biomarker for Monitoring Seizure Progression

2024· preprint· en· W4403854868 on OpenAlexaff
Nooshin Bahador, Frances K. Skinner, Liang Zhang, Milad Lankarany

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsKrembil FoundationUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIctalChirpEpilepsyBiomarkerMedicineEpileptic seizureElectroencephalographyNeurosciencePsychologyBiologyBiochemistryPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Despite being prevalent, the causes, mechanisms, and progression of epilepsy—a chronic neurological disorder with unprovoked seizures—are not well understood, complicating drug development for treatment. This study used a comprehensive mouse epilepsy kindling model dataset to investigate frequency modulation (chirp) as a potential indicator of distinct states of epilepsy (early evoked discharge, late evoked discharge, spontaneous recurrent seizure, and drug state). Employing time-frequency ridge extraction, chirp identification, and statistical testing, our analyses revealed that chirp patterns occur in the majority of ictal discharges (>81.6%), persisting across evoked and spontaneous seizures. While the focus was on hippocampal recordings, chirps were also detected in the piriform peripheral cortex. Significant frequency and duration changes in chirp patterns during the transition from early to late evoked ictal events suggest their potential as the screening tool for seizure progression. Additionally, detailed analyses illuminate the impact of Lorazepam, a GABA A enhancer, on chirp characteristics, providing insights into how increased inhibitory tone quantifiably influences excitatory-inhibitory balances during seizures.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207