Visuomotor Response Time in Children With a Mild Traumatic Brain Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Compare the visuomotor response times of children after a mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) with those of noninjured children matched for age, sex, and premorbid level of physical activity. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Pediatric trauma center. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-eight children aged 7 to 16 years in each group. Children with mTBI had a mean Glasgow Coma Scale score of 14.8 and were considered normal on a neurological assessment carried out at the time of hospital discharge. Noninjured children were friends of those with mTBI. INTERVENTION: Assessments of response time were conducted at 1, 4, and 12 weeks after mTBI and at corresponding time intervals for the control children. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The response speed subtest of the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency (BOTMP); reaction and movement time for upper and lower extremities, for simple, choice, and reversed choice response time paradigms. RESULTS: Over the assessment period, children with mTBI performed worse than the control group only on the response speed subtest of the BOTMP. The mTBI children however tended to have slower movement times 1 week postinjury for the reversed choice response time paradigm for the lower extremities. CONCLUSIONS: Some children with mTBI may have some problems in response time persisting until 12 weeks postinjury. Further research is required to better identify and understand the severity of these problems and determine their impact, if any, on participation in physical activities.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".