ArticleCNS neuroscience & therapeutics2025
Quantitative Cortex-Based Mapping With Hybrid
Article in CNS neuroscience & therapeutics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Multimodal artificial intelligence in epilepsy: antiseizure medication response, epileptogenic zone localization, and surgical outcome prediction.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesLocalization of the network underlying drug-resistant focal epilepsy in individuals considering surgical treatment with unremarkable MRI is challenging. Concordance rates of 40%-69% have been reported with FDG-PET image statistical parametric mapping (SPM). We investigated the efficacy of postprocessing specific to cortices by cortex-based mapping (CBM) on hybrid PET/MR images with healthy subjects to localize sites of seizure onset.
methodsWe retrospectively examined the PET/MR images of 42 MRI-negative individuals with drug-resistant focal epilepsy who had surgery and 23 healthy subjects. Visual interpretation of standardized uptake value ratios (SUVRs), voxelwise mapping with a two-sample t-test of SUVRs (t-map, SPM), and the proposed z-transformation of the SUVR of patients compared with those of healthy subjects acquired with CBM were compared with the surgical field. Kappa tests, conclusive concordance (CC), partial concordance (PC), and discordance were estimated, with McNemar's test determining the superiority.
resultsAfter an average follow-up of 37.2 months, in people who were seizure-free (n = 31; functionally silent cortices in 26), the CC rate with CBM was 87.10%. Performance was CBM (CC:PC = 27:1), t-map (CC:PC = 15:1), and SUVR (CC:PC = 0:17). The sensitivity, specificity, and kappa scores were 0.87, 0.91, and 0.717 (p < 0.001) for CBM and 0.48, 0.73, and 0.153 (p = 0.288) for t-maps, respectively. The CBM approach was superior to the t-map (p < 0.001) in most extratemporal epilepsies. The average Pearson's r of CBM and t-map to artifacts was 0.08 ± 0.02 and 0.33 ± 0.02, respectively.
interpretationBy eliminating intersubject morphological variations and explicit statistics at the cortex, CBM localized the seizure origin in MRI-negative epilepsy patients with superior efficiency.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.