Sweep visual evoked potentials in children with west syndrome before and during vigabatrin treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vigabatrin (VGB) is associated with visual complications in 30–40% of adults with epilepsy taking the drug. Here, sweep visual evoked potential (VEP) was used to assess peak contrast sensitivity (CS) in children taking vigabatrin. In the longitudinal study subjects (n = 15) with West Syndrome (childhood epileptic disorder) before VGB (baseline) were tested. Six were tested 5-months after and five after 10-months taking vigabatrin. A significant peak CS deficit was found in the baseline group. Little change was seen in peak CS 5- and 10-months after starting VGB. In the cross-sectional study, 11 subjects (VGB-exposed) were compared with a control group (typically developing children) and with children on anti-epileptic drugs (AEDs) other than VGB. A significant deficit in peak CS was found in the VGB-exposed group when compared with the control and the AED group. Peak CS is poorer in children with West Syndrome. VGB may be associated with an impaired ability to detect low contrasts.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".