MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2147002574 · doi:10.1080/000164802753648150

Eye Motility and Auditory Brainstem Response Dysfunction after Whiplash Injury

2002· article· en· W2147002574 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
B.-I. Wenngren, K. Pettersson, Gudmund Löwenhielm, Christer Hildingsson

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Oto-Laryngologica · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWhiplashMedicineBrainstemPathologicalAudiologyBrainstem auditory evoked potentialAnesthesiaPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPoison controlInternal medicineEmergency medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to identify the prevalence of brain/brainstem dysfunction after acute whiplash trauma (grades II and III according to the Quebec Task Force Classification on whiplash-associated disorders) and to investigate a possible correlation between the development of chronic symptoms and objective findings from auditory brainstem response (ABR) and eye motility tests. We used ABR and oculomotor tests and a thorough clinical, subjective and psychological evaluation in a sample of prospective whiplash trauma patients who were followed up for 2 years after the trauma. The initial test results did not reveal any prognostic clinical signs for the tested group as a whole, but we could discriminate some patients with clinical symptoms and signs paired with pathologic test results. Over time, some patients normalized clinically and their test results improved while others deteriorated clinically and their test results were worse at the 2-year investigation. Our findings of moderate derangements in the tests could be the effects of pain and/or changed cervical afferent activity at the brain/brainstem level, while eye motility dysfunction, in addition to pathological neuro-otological findings in a small proportion of the patients with severe symptoms, could be explained by lesions to the brain/brainstem.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.368
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations41
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Oto-LaryngologicaSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207