Eye Motility and Auditory Brainstem Response Dysfunction after Whiplash Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".