Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neil S Pandya,1 Mirna Vrbancic,2 Lady Diana Ladino,3,4 José F Téllez-Zenteno31Department of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada; 2Department of Clinical Health Psychology, Royal University Hospital, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada; 3Division of Neurology, Department of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada; 4Department of Neurology, College of Medicine, University of Antioquia, Medellin, ColombiaPurpose: We report the rare case of a patient with intractable epilepsy and escalating aggression, resulting in murder, who had complete resolution of her seizures and explosive behavior following a right temporal lobectomy.Patients and methods: We searched the available literature from 1880 to 2013 for cases of epilepsy being used as a court defense for murder and collected information regarding the final sentencing outcomes. We selected 15 papers with a total of 50 homicides.Results: We describe the case of a 47-year-old woman with drug-resistant right temporal epilepsy who developed increasing emotional lability, outbursts of anger and escalating violent behavior culminating in a violent murder. The patient was imprisoned while awaiting trial. In the interim, she underwent a successful temporal lobectomy with full resolution of seizures, interictal rage and aggressive behaviors. After the surgery, her charges were downgraded and she was transferred to a psychiatric facility.Conclusion: The aggressive behavior associated with epilepsy has been described in the literature for over a century. A link between epilepsy and aggression has been disproportionally emphasized. These patients share some common characteristics: they are usually young men with a long history of epilepsy and lower than average intelligence. The violent act is postictal, sudden-onset, more likely to occur after a cluster of seizures and is usually related with alcohol abuse.Keywords: aggression, crime, epilepsy surgery, murder, temporal lobectomy
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".