Do generalized epilepsies exhibit more attentional or executive disorders?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to characterize attentional and executive dysfunctions in patients with genetic generalized epilepsies (GGE), using specific and validated neuropsychological tools. Secondary objectives included estimating the prevalence of cognitive impairments and exploring potential clinical and psychosocial determinants. A total of 69 adult patients with GGE were enrolled in this multicentric observational study. Participants completed screening questionnaires for anxiety and depression and underwent a battery of neuropsychological tests assessing four attentional components (alertness, sustained, selective, and divided attention), executive functions (flexibility, inhibition, verbal initiation and auditory working memory). Attentional and executive impairments were highly prevalent, affecting approximately 60-64 % of the cohort. Divided attention was the most frequently impaired attentional component (44.93 %), while mental flexibility was the most commonly affected executive function (39.68 %). Selective and sustained attention were relatively preserved. Working memory manipulation was impaired in 17.4 % of patients. Cognitive performance was weakly influenced by clinical and psychosocial factors. Anxiety or depression was associated with poorer divided attention, epilepsy duration with lower selective attention, and education and number of anti-seizure medications with better performance across selective, sustained, and executive attention domains. These findings highlight the need for targeted neuropsychological assessments in GGE, prioritizing divided attention and flexibility. Since divided attention reflects both attentional control and working memory interventions focusing on working memory may offer greater clinic utility. Given the scarcity of studies on cognition rehabilitation in epilepsy, further research is needed, particularly on divided attention as a potential cognitive remediation target.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".