Neuroimaging dual task performance in youth after sports-related concussion: an fMRI study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To identify the neural substrates of a dual-task paradigm and evaluate performance in concussed versus non-concussed youth 3–6 months post-injury. Design Standard structural (T1, T2, FLAIR, DTI) and functional (single-shot T2*-weighted pulse sequence with in-out spiral readout images) were collected using a 3 Tesla imaging system. fMRIstat was used to analyse the data. Setting Male participants 9–15 years of age were recruited from The Greater Toronto Hockey League and The Hospital for Sick Children via poster advertising. Subjects 13 concussed youth (mean age=12.61+1.55 years) and 14 control subjects (mean age 12.59±1.55 years). Intervention None. Outcome Measures Accuracy (ACC) and reaction time (RT) during (1) a 0–3 back visuospatial working memory task; (2) a two finger button pressing motor task and (3) dual-task cost associated with simultaneously performing the working memory and motor tasks. Results There were no significant group differences across single and dual-task conditions. Although both groups activated similar brain regions across tasks, concussed youth demonstrated significantly less percent BOLD change in the prefrontal cortex across all working memory task comparisons. Similar results were found during the 1 vs 0 back and 2 vs 0 back dual task conditions, but not for the 3 vs 0 back dual task condition. Conclusions Differences in brain function can be observed in youth who have sustained a single injury 3–6 months earlier. Further research is needed to identify the clinical correlates of these atypical activation patterns. Acknowledgements Canadian Institute of Health Research (CIHR) and Ontario Neurotrauma Foundation (ONF). Competing interests None.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".