MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7117300922 · doi:10.1212/wnl.0000000000214511

Fast Ripples Measured From Overnight SEEG Recordings as Markers of the Epileptogenic Zone

2025· article· en· W7117300922 on OpenAlexaffabout
Päivi Nevalainen, Nicolás von Ellenrieder, Roy Dudley, Neevya Balasubramaniam, Sándor Beniczky, Melita Čačić Hribljan, Martin Fabricius, Alyssa Ho, Henna Jonsson, Anders Christian Meidahl, Eve Michaud, Miki Nikolic, Rune Rasmussen, Eero Salli, Annette Sidaros, Birgit Frauscher, J. Gotman

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsMontreal Children's HospitalMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStereoelectroencephalographyResectionEpilepsy surgeryOdds ratioEpilepsyElectrodiagnosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Epilepsy surgery outcomes after intracranial EEG remain suboptimal necessitating the discovery of additional biomarkers to define the epileptogenic zone. Fast ripples (FRs) are a promising, new interictal epilepsy biomarker. By analyzing a multicenter data set consisting of overnight stereo-EEG (SEEG) recordings, we aimed at validating FRs as an accurate marker of the epileptogenic zone. We hypothesized that removing ≥60% of total FR events would significantly increase the odds of good postsurgical outcome (Engel class I). In addition, we compared FRs with spikes, and spikes co-occurring with FRs (spike-FRs) as surgery outcome predictors. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included consecutive patients from 4 epilepsy surgery centers in Canada, Finland, and Denmark, who underwent SEEG followed by resective surgery or a preplanned ablation procedure separate from the SEEG and had at least 1 year of follow-up. We detected FRs and spikes automatically from overnight SEEG recordings edited for artifacts. To calculate resection ratios of the detected events, we determined resected SEEG contacts by superimposing the peri-implantation and postresection images. We evaluated postsurgical seizure outcomes from medical records. RESULTS: = 0.007, DOR 4.1, 95% CI 1.4-12, accuracy 64%, 95% CI 52%-75%), whereas the spike resection ratio ≥0.6 was not. DISCUSSION: In accordance with our hypothesis, the FR resection ratio ≥0.6 significantly increased the odds of attaining good postsurgical seizure outcome. Although the FR resection ratio ≥0.6 accurately predicted good postsurgical outcome, resecting <0.6 of FRs did not necessarily mean poor outcome. As predictors of postsurgical outcome, spikes fared poorly, whereas spike-FRs were comparable with FRs.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurology→Same topicEpilepsy research and treatment→French-language works237,207→