Image_2_Social cognition in children and adolescents with epilepsy: A meta-analysis.TIF
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>Many studies have investigated impairments in two key domains of social cognition (theory of mind [ToM] and facial emotion recognition [FER]) in children and adolescents with epilepsy. However, inconsistent conclusions were found. Our objective was to characterize social cognition performance of children and adolescents with epilepsy. A literature search was conducted using Web of Science, PubMed, and Embase databases. The article retrieval, screening, quality assessment (Newcastle-Ottawa-Scale), and data extraction were performed independently by two investigators. A random-effects model was used to examine estimates. The meta-analysis included 19 studies, with a combined sample of 623 children and adolescents with epilepsy (mean [SD] age, 12.13 [2.62] years; 46.1% female) and 677 healthy controls [HCs]) (mean [SD] age, 11.48 [2.71] years; 50.7% female). The results revealed that relative to HCs, children and adolescents with epilepsy exhibited deficits in ToM (g = −1.08, 95% CI [−1.38, −0.78], p < 0.001, the number of studies [k] = 13), FER (g = −0.98, 95% CI [−1.33, −0.64], p < 0.001, k = 12), and ToM subcomponents (cognitive ToM: g = −1.04, 95% CI [−1.35, −0.72], p < 0.001, k = 12] and affective ToM: g = −0.73, 95% CI [−1.12, −0.34], p < 0.001, k = 8). In addition, there were no statistically significant differences in social cognition deficits between children and adolescents with focal epilepsy and generalized epilepsy. Meta-regressions confirmed the robustness of the results. These quantitative results further deepen our understanding of the two core domains of social cognition in children and adolescents with epilepsy and may assist in the development of cognitive interventions for this patient population.</p><p>Systematic review registration:https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2022-3-0011/, identifier INPLASY202230011.</p>
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.939 | 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 teacher head, 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".