MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The EEG in Coma

2000· review· en· W2123261069 on OpenAlexaff
G. Bryan Young

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComa (optics)ElectroencephalographyBurst suppressionBrainstemPersistent vegetative stateMedicineBrain functionCategorizationNeuroscienceAnesthesiaAudiologyPsychologyConsciousnessComputer scienceMinimally conscious statePhysicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The EEG allows insight into thalamocortical function in comatose patients when this is inaccessible clinically. A single EEG can help with broad diagnostic categorization whereas continuous or serial EEG provides monitoring for unstable and potentially treatable conditions and for monitoring the effects of therapy. The EEG plays a supplemental role in establishing the prognosis in disease states that are capable of causing neuronal death. The most prevalent and problematic of these conditions involves survivors of cardiac arrest who are initially in coma with intact brainstem reflexes. In such patients single EEGs are of 100% specificity for no possibility of recovery of consciousness only for essentially complete generalized suppression (<10 microV) after the first day of the arrest. Several other generalized patterns, including less marked suppression, burst-suppression, epileptiform activity, periodic complexes, and alpha-theta coma patterns, usually but not invariably indicate a poor outcome. Serial EEGs, continuous raw and automated "trending," testing of reactivity, and the inclusion of multiple variables hold promise for an improved role in the prognostic determination in these patients.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.473
Teacher spread0.377 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations286
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical NeurophysiologySame topicCardiac Arrest and ResuscitationFrench-language works237,207