MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2177265244 · doi:10.5298/1081-5937-43.1.07

Treating Postconcussion Syndrome with LORETA Z-Score Neurofeedback and Heart Rate Variability Biofeedback: Neuroanatomical/Neurophysiological Rationale, Methods, and Case Examples

2015· article· en· W2177265244 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Thompson, Lynda Thompson, Andrea Reid-Chung

Bibliographic record

VenueBiofeedback · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsADD Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeurofeedbackBiofeedbackTraumatic brain injuryHeart rate variabilityAnxietyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationNeuropsychologyConcussionPsychologyNeurophysiologyRehabilitationElectroencephalographyQuantitative electroencephalographyHeart rateMedicinePhysical therapyPoison controlCognitionInjury preventionNeurosciencePsychiatryInternal medicineMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Media attention has highlighted the critical problem of concussion injuries in sport and the challenge of treating and rehabilitating individuals with traumatic brain injury. The authors present a framework for the treatment of traumatic brain injury, using low-resolution electromagnetic tomography Z-score based neurofeedback and heart rate–variability biofeedback. The article advocates a comprehensive assessment process including the use of a 19-channel quantitative electroencephalogram, a heart rate variability baseline, and symptom severity questionnaires for attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, depression, and anxiety. The initial medical assessment, neuropsychological assessment, and evoked potential studies also have potential for a more precise assessment of deficits in brain activation patterns, which assists the targeting of neurofeedback training.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.646
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations14
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiofeedbackSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207