The spectrum of cognitive outcomes following admission to hospital for refractory status epilepticus (RSE): A scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Refractory status epilepticus (RSE) may have many different causes. Preventing neurological complications and controlling acute seizures are early priorities, but long-term cognitive consequences must also be considered. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this scoping review is to report the spectrum of outcomes following admission to hospital for RSE from all etiologies and to determine whether there is evidence to suggest that survivors of new-onset RSE (NORSE) have different cognitive outcomes compared to survivors of RSE of identified etiology. METHODS: Scoping review methodology was used for this study. A clinical librarian prepared the search strategy. Studies were eligible if they were original research reporting cognitive outcomes after RSE. RESULTS: 2202 articles were identified, of which 2121 were excluded. After full text review, we included 14 studies. Studies were from 2005-2023 and included retrospective, prospective and case studies with a total of 323 patients from ages 1-80 years. Outcomes were similar across studies, but there was heterogeneity with respect to tests used and timing of outcome measurement. Most pediatric reports were in survivors of NORSE and a minority of pediatric survivors return to baseline, with a large proportion of survivors having intellectual disability ranging from mild to severe. Outcomes were less consistent across adult survivors, with some having minimal cognitive impairment and others reporting that no previously employed patients returning to employment. CONCLUSION: Current approaches to cognitive assessment in survivors of RSE are highly variable. A large proportion of survivors had impairment in greater than one cognitive domain. Future research should focus on using age-appropriate, domain-specific tools administered at defined timepoints post-RSE.
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 | 0.005 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".