MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4416224755 · doi:10.3390/jcm14228071

Not All Spikes Are Equal

2025· review· en· W4416224755 on OpenAlexafffund
Anita Datta

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsBC Children's Hospital
FundersBC Children's Hospital
KeywordsIctalContext (archaeology)ElectroencephalographyEpilepsyElectrophysiologyTemporal lobe

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

EEG remains the primary diagnostic tool for evaluating seizures in children, with interictal epileptiform discharges (IEDs) serving as key biomarkers of epileptogenic activity. However, not all IEDs have the same prognostic significance. Variations in IED topography, morphology, frequency, and timing influence outcomes in pediatric epilepsy. The developing brain's maturation affects IED location and features, creating age-specific patterns with distinct implications. For example, occipital and midline IEDs are common in young children, with midline IEDs strongly linked to increased seizures and developmental delay than control patients. Morphological features provide additional prognostic stratification. While centrotemporal IEDs with tangential dipoles are well-established as favorable prognostic markers, IEDs exhibiting tangential dipoles in any brain region are associated with more benign clinical courses than control patients. Conversely, positive sharp waves persisting beyond the neonatal period signal less favorable prognosis, including developmental delay, abnormal neurological examination, and structural brain abnormalities. Additionally, IEDs occurring on ripples have been shown to serve as more reliable interictal biomarkers of the epileptogenic zone than IEDs or ripples alone. Topography, frequency and sleep-state dependence also carry clinical significance, as frequent IEDs during slow-wave sleep may impact cognition. Furthermore, the temporal context of IED occurrence during seizure onset, treatment, activation procedures, medication withdrawal, or after epilepsy surgery provides valuable prognostic information. Recognition of these nuanced electrophysiological distinctions enhances clinicians' ability to predict clinical trajectories and optimize long-term management strategies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score0.384

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0090.008
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1150.079

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 head0.420
GPT teacher head0.612
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Medicine→Same topicEpilepsy research and treatment→French-language works237,207→