MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162067857 · doi:10.1109/tbme.2006.870255

Quantifying Cortical Activity During General Anesthesia Using Wavelet Analysis

2006· article· en· W2162067857 on OpenAlexaff
Tatjana Zikov, S. Bibian, Guy A. Dumont, M. Huzmezan, Craig R. Ries

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Sedative Agents
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectroencephalographyWaveletSurrogate dataWavelet transformPattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceAnesthesiaMathematicsNeurosciencePsychologyMedicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reports on a novel method for quantifying the cortical activity of a patient during general anesthesia as a surrogate measure of the patient's level of consciousness. The proposed technique is based on the analysis of a single-channel (frontal) electroencephalogram (EEG) signal using stationary wavelet transform (SWT). The wavelet coefficients calculated from the EEG are pooled into a statistical representation, which is then compared to two well-defined states: the awake state with normal EEG activity, and the isoelectric state with maximal cortical depression. The resulting index, referred to as the wavelet-based anesthetic value for central nervous system monitoring (WAV(CNS)), quantifies the depth of consciousness between these two extremes. To validate the proposed technique, we present a clinical study which explores the advantages of the WAV(CNS) in comparison with the BIS monitor (Aspect Medical Systems, MA), currently a reference in consciousness monitoring. Results show that the WAV(CNS) and BIS are well correlated (r = 0.969) during periods of steady-state despite fundamental algorithmic differences. However, in terms of dynamic behavior, the WAV(CNS) offers faster tracking of transitory changes at induction and emergence, with an average lead of 15-30 s. Furthermore, and conversely to the BIS, the WAV(CNS) regains its preinduction baseline value when patients are responding to verbal command after emergence from anesthesia. We conclude that the proposed analysis technique is an attractive alternative to BIS monitoring. In addition, we show that the WAV(CNS) dynamics can be modeled as a linear time invariant transfer function. This index is, therefore, well suited for use as a feedback sensor in advisory systems, closed-loop control schemes, and for the identification of the pharmacodynamic models of anesthetic drugs.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.001

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.274
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations176
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical EngineeringSame topicAnesthesia and Sedative AgentsFrench-language works237,207