Visual P300 Effects Beyond Symptoms in Concussed College Athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to assess whether cerebral anomalies may be observed in the absence of clinical symptoms, the current study compared the effects of concussions on attentional capacities (reaction times, accuracy) and Event-Related Potentials (ERPs) in concussed athletes with (n = 10) or without (n = 10) symptoms as well as in athletes who never had a concussion (n = 10). The P300 response was recorded from 28 electrodes during a modified visual oddball paradigm. Participants were instructed to press a key upon the appearance of the frequent stimuli as well as when a rare nontarget stimulus followed the frequent one. The other key was to be pressed when the subsequent rare stimuli (rare target) appeared until a frequent one reappeared. The symptomatic athletes displayed longer reaction times than the other two groups of athletes. The P300 amplitude to the rare target stimuli was significantly more attenuated in the symptomatic athletes than in the other two groups. Moreover, the P300 amplitude varied inversely with the severity of post-concussion symptoms but was not influenced by time elapsed since injury. Although the clinical significance of the P300 differences shown by the symptomatic athletes is still uncertain, the results do indicate that symptom severity may be a crucial indicator of functional impairments following mild traumatic brain injury.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".