Evidence demands action: An invitation to share the burden of proof
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We welcome critical engagement with our study, "Dravet Syndrome: From Neurodevelopmental to Neurodegenerative Disease?" 1 and appreciate the opportunity to clarify our findings, strengthen our interpretations, and reassert their clinical importance. 1 The critiques raised (Sisodiya et al., 2025) underscore the importance of epistemological rigor and conceptual precision, which we support. 2 Yet, we must assert that our findings are robust, significant, and demand thoughtful reconsideration of current assumptions about the adult phenotype of Dravet syndrome (DS). | CONCEPTUAL FRAMING: NOT PREMATURE, BUT NECESSARYTerminological accuracy must not come at the expense of timely scientific inquiry.DS was once called "severe myoclonic epilepsy of infancy," a term that did not encompass the full clinical spectrum.Today, DS is classified as a developmental and epileptic encephalopathy (DEE), but this classification does not preclude the emergence of neurodegenerative processes later in life.
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 | 0.275 | 0.697 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.038 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.034 | 0.061 |
| Open science | 0.016 | 0.029 |
| Research integrity | 0.109 | 0.141 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.036 | 0.040 |
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".