MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6910826153 · doi:10.5061/dryad.5dv41ns55

VNS and seizure outcomes in pediatric refractory epilepsy: Systematic review and meta-analysis

2021· dataset· en· W6910826153 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2021
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDravet syndromeEpilepsyConfidence intervalClinical trialRegression analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This data provides supplemental information for the systematic review and Meta-analysis. Supplemental tables report the detailed serach strategy (Supplementary Table 1), details of included studies (Supplementary Table 2), list of excluded studies (Supplementary Table 3), 50% Responder Rate in children with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome after VNS insertion (Supplementary Table 4), 50% Responder Rate in children with Dravet syndrome after VNS insertion (Supplementary Table 5), VNS settings and other seizure outcomes reported in the included studies (Supplementary Table 6) and Studies reporting a formal Quality of life (QOL) assessment in children post VNS implantation (Supplementary Table 7). Supplemental figure 1 (S1) shows the PRISMA flowchart for this systematic review. Supplemental Figure 2 (S2): Determinants of Seizure Outcomes. Multivariable regression showed 50%-RR at last reported follow-up to increase with increasing age of onset of seizures and decrease with the number of ASMs tried before VNS implantation (A). Higher 50%-RR 1-year after VNS implantation was seen in patients with shorter duration of epilepsy and fewer number of ASM trials (B). Decline in 50%-RR at 1 and 2 year follow-up in studies with a higher proportion of males (C). Proportion of seizure free patients at last reported follow-up also decreases with a greater number of ASM trials before VNS implantation (D). [50%-RR: 50% Responder Rate, ASM: Anti-seizure Medication, VNS: Vagus Nerve Stimulator; Bubbles represent individual effect size for studies, lines represent ordinary least squares regression models, and the shading represents 95% confidence regions. Supplemental figure 3 (S3): Forest plots for proportion of seizure free patients. Forest plots for proportion of patients with 50% responder rate at 6 months (B), 1 year (C) and 2 years (D) follow-up summarizing the pooled effect estimate and heterogeneity. Supplemental figure 4 (S4): Forest plots for proportion of seizure free patients. Forest plots for proportion of seizure free patients at 6 months (B), 1 year (C) and 2 years (D) follow-up summarizing the pooled effect estimate and heterogeneity.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
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: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.040
Bibliometrics0.0060.008
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.278 · 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
GenreDataset

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MIND→French-language works237,207→