MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079788707 · doi:10.1212/wnl.0b013e31823fcd61

Disruptions of functional connectivity in the default mode network of comatose patients

2012· article· en· W2079788707 on OpenAlexaff
Loretta Norton, R. Matthew Hutchison, G. Bryan Young, D.H. Lee, Michael D. Sharpe, Seyed M. Mirsattari

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDefault mode networkComa (optics)ConsciousnessPersistent vegetative stateLevel of consciousnessMinimally conscious stateCognitionConsciousness DisordersPsychologyCardiologyNeuroscienceMedicineInternal medicineAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the possible role of the default mode network (DMN) in consciousness and assess the diagnostic or prognostic potential of DMN connectivity measures in the assessment of a patient group lacking cognitive awareness. METHODS: DMN connectivity was established using independent component analysis of resting-state fMRI data in patients with reversible (n = 2) and irreversible (n = 11) coma following cardiac arrest and compared to healthy controls (n = 12). RESULTS: A present and intact DMN was observed in controls and those patients who subsequently regained consciousness, but was disrupted in all patients who failed to regain consciousness. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that the DMN is necessary but not sufficient to support consciousness. Clinically, DMN connectivity may serve as an indicator of the extent of cortical disruption and predict reversible impairments in consciousness.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.069
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations206
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurologySame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207