The role that choice of model plays in predictions for epilepsy surgery
dc.contributor.author | Junges, L | |
dc.contributor.author | Lopes, MA | |
dc.contributor.author | Terry, JR | |
dc.contributor.author | Goodfellow, M | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2019-06-13T10:02:15Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2019-05-14 | |
dc.description.abstract | Mathematical modelling has been widely used to predict the effects of perturbations to brain networks. An important example is epilepsy surgery, where the perturbation in question is the removal of brain tissue in order to render the patient free of seizures. Different dynamical models have been proposed to represent transitions to ictal states in this context. However, our choice of which mathematical model to use to address this question relies on making assumptions regarding the mechanism that defines the transition from background to the seizure state. Since these mechanisms are unknown, it is important to understand how predictions from alternative dynamical descriptions compare. Herein we evaluate to what extent three different dynamical models provide consistent predictions for the effect of removing nodes from networks. We show that for small, directed, connected networks the three considered models provide consistent predictions. For larger networks, predictions are shown to be less consistent. However consistency is higher in networks that have sufficiently large differences in ictogenicity between nodes. We further demonstrate that heterogeneity in ictogenicity across nodes correlates with variability in the number of connections for each node. | en_GB |
dc.description.sponsorship | Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) | en_GB |
dc.description.sponsorship | Medical Research Council (MRC) | en_GB |
dc.description.sponsorship | Epilepsy Research UK | en_GB |
dc.description.sponsorship | Wellcome Trust | en_GB |
dc.identifier.citation | Vol. 9, article 7351 | en_GB |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1038/s41598-019-43871-7 | |
dc.identifier.grantnumber | EP/N014391/1 | en_GB |
dc.identifier.grantnumber | MR/K013998/1 | en_GB |
dc.identifier.grantnumber | P1505 | en_GB |
dc.identifier.grantnumber | WT105618MA | en_GB |
dc.identifier.grantnumber | EP/P021417/1 | en_GB |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10871/37508 | |
dc.language.iso | en | en_GB |
dc.publisher | Nature Research | en_GB |
dc.rights | © The Author(s) 2019. Open Access. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. | en_GB |
dc.title | The role that choice of model plays in predictions for epilepsy surgery | en_GB |
dc.type | Article | en_GB |
dc.date.available | 2019-06-13T10:02:15Z | |
dc.description | This is the final version. Available on open access from Nature Research via the DOI in this record | en_GB |
dc.identifier.eissn | 2045-2322 | |
dc.identifier.journal | Scientific Reports | en_GB |
dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ | en_GB |
dcterms.dateAccepted | 2019-05-02 | |
exeter.funder | ::Medical Research Council (MRC) | en_GB |
exeter.funder | ::Wellcome Trust | en_GB |
exeter.funder | ::Epilepsy Research UK | en_GB |
exeter.funder | ::Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) | en_GB |
exeter.funder | ::Wellcome Trust | en_GB |
rioxxterms.version | VoR | en_GB |
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate | 2019-12-01 | |
rioxxterms.type | Journal Article/Review | en_GB |
refterms.dateFCD | 2019-06-13T09:58:20Z | |
refterms.versionFCD | VoR | |
refterms.dateFOA | 2019-06-13T10:02:32Z | |
refterms.panel | B | en_GB |
Files in this item
This item appears in the following Collection(s)
Except where otherwise noted, this item's licence is described as © The Author(s) 2019. Open Access. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.