MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The impact of cognitive impairment due to epilepsy on quality of life: What do we know?

2025· review· en· W4410883647 on OpenAlexafffund
Theodore Aliyianis, Gavin P. Winston

Bibliographic record

VenueEpilepsy Research · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersFaculty of Health Sciences, Queen's UniversityPhysicians' Services Incorporated Foundation
KeywordsEpilepsyQuality of life (healthcare)Cognitive impairmentCognitionPsychologyPsychiatryPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

People with epilepsy (PWE) often experience cognitive impairment that negatively affects their quality of life (QOL). However, the relationship between patterns of cognitive impairment and QOL is not well established either overall or within different epilepsy subtypes. Our understanding is limited by the heterogeneity of the tools used to measure QOL across studies and subtypes of epilepsy and the lack of standardization between cognitive assessment batteries. This narrative review explores the current approaches used to investigate this relationship and identifies key findings from the literature. We highlight the need to standardize approaches to measuring QOL and cognition with studies focusing on specific epilepsy subtypes. We suggest expanding cognitive assessments to include social cognition, which correlates with QOL in PWE. Both researchers and clinicians can use this narrative review as another step toward characterizing the unique effects of cognitive impairment in the treatment of epilepsy.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.512
Teacher spread0.371 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpilepsy ResearchSame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207