MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406421459 · doi:10.1111/epi.18217

Lateralizing value of interictal epileptiform discharges and other parameters in hypothalamic hamartoma

2025· article· en· W4406421459 on OpenAlexaff
Friederike Niedermoser, Sarah M. Metzger, Kathrin Wagner, Peter C. Reinacher, Jan Schönberger, Julia Jacobs, Andreas Schulze‐Bonhage, Kerstin Alexandra Klotz

Bibliographic record

VenueEpilepsia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
FundersMedizinische Fakultät der Albert-Ludwigs-Universität FreiburgAlbert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg
KeywordsHypothalamic hamartomaIctalGelastic seizureHamartomaMedicineEpilepsyClinical neurologyPsychologyNeuroscienceInternal medicinePrecocious pubertyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objective Hypothalamic hamartomas (HHs) are associated with pharmacoresistant epilepsy. Stereotactic radiofrequency thermocoagulation (SRT) shows promise as a disconnecting intervention. Although magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is typically used to determine the attachment and intervention side, it presents challenges in cases of bilaterally attached HH, where the epileptogenic side is unclear. The lateralizing potential of electroclinical parameters in such cases remains uncertain. This retrospective study evaluates the lateralization value of specific parameters, particularly in patients with unilateral HH, to improve future diagnostics and treatment approaches for bilateral HH. Methods Four lateralizing parameters—semiology, ictal electroencephalography (EEG), and interictal epileptiform discharges during awake (IEDs w ) and sleep states (IEDs s )—were assessed for correlation with HH attachment side using Spearman's ρ. We calculated areas under the curves (AUCs) and cutoffs for left and right IED s prognostic lateralizing value, plotting differences between IED s right and IED s left in a receiver‐operating characteristic(ROC) curve to establish the required preponderance of unilateral IEDs s to differentiate between left and right HHs. Binomial logistic regression was employed to predict the HH attachment side. Results We included 25 patients (2–55 years of age) with mainly unilateral ( n = 22) HHs who underwent SRT and presurgical evaluation. All parameters correlated with HH attachment side (semiology R = −.62, p = .005; ictal EEG R = .51, p = .047; IED s R = .55, p = .018; IED w , R = .61, p = .018). AUC values for right and left IED s were .76 ( p = .047) and .85 ( p = .019), respectively, with cutoffs of .34 and .15. The AUC for “IED s right –IED s left ” was .98 ( p = .0018) with a cutoff of .16. IEDs s and semiology were significant predictors, achieving 88% correct lateralization. Significance IEDs s are promising biomarkers for HH lateralization in unilateral HH. The predominance of unilateral IEDs s suggests ipsilateral HH. Even in cases with predominantly bilateral IEDs s , a slight preponderance of unilateral IEDs s can indicate the attachment side. In addition, combining IEDs s and semiology provides a predictive model for HH lateralization.

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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpilepsiaSame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207