Brain Functions After Sports-Related Concussion: Insights From Event-Related Potentials and Functional MRI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The high incidence of concussions in contact sports and their impact on brain functions are a major cause for concern. To improve our understanding of brain functioning after sports-related concussion, advanced functional assessment techniques, namely event-related potentials (ERPs) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), have been recently used in research studies. Contrary to neuropsychological tests that measure verbal and/or motor responses, ERPs and fMRI assess the neural activities associated with cognitive/behavioral demands, and thus provide access to better comprehension of brain functioning. In fact, ERPs have excellent temporal resolution, and fMRI identifies the involved structures during a task. This article describes ERP and fMRI techniques and reviews the results obtained with these tools in sports-related concussion. Although these techniques are not yet readily available, they offer a unique clinical approach, particularly for complex cases (ie, athletes with multiple concussions, chronic symptoms) and objective measures that provide valuable information to guide management and return-to-play decision making.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".