Understanding of Consciousness in Absence Seizures: A Literature Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Emilie Groulx-Boivin,1,2 Tasha Bouchet,3 Kenneth A Myers1,2,4 1Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Montreal Children’s Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; 2Department of Pediatrics, Montreal Children’s Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; 3Department of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; 4Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, CanadaCorrespondence: Kenneth A Myers, Montreal Children’s Hospital, 1001 Décarie Blvd, Montreal, Quebec, H4A 3J1, Canada, Tel +1 514-412-4466, Fax +1 514-412-4373, Email kenneth.myers@mcgill.caAbstract: Absence seizures are classically associated with behavioral arrest and transient deficits in consciousness, yet substantial variability exists in the severity of the impairment. Despite several decades of research on the topic, the pathophysiology of absence seizures and the mechanisms underlying behavioral impairment remain unclear. Several rationales have been proposed including widespread cortical deactivation, reduced perception of external stimuli, and transient suspension of the default mode network, among others. This review aims to summarize the current knowledge on the neural correlates of impaired consciousness in absence seizures. We review evidence from studies using animal models of absence epilepsy, electroencephalography, functional magnetic resonance imaging, magnetoencephalography, positron emission tomography, and single photon emission computed tomography.Keywords: awareness, electroencephalography, functional magnetic resonance imaging, positron emission tomography, single photon emission computed tomography, magnetoencephalography, fMRI, MEG, PET
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".