MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Response Time and Gaze Behaviour in Individuals with Post Concussion Syndrome

2015· article· en· W2468878155 on OpenAlexaff
Stephanie A. Ramautar, Michael E. Cinelli

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConcussionGazePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPopulationAudiologyPsychologyFixation (population genetics)HeadachesMedicinePoison controlInjury preventionSurgeryMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Upon sustaining a concussion, a minority of cases may experience symptoms beyond the expected average recovery timeline of 3-15 days and are classified as having Post-Concussion Syndrome (PCS). Possible predictors of PCS include attention and memory tasks, serum protein levels, headaches and dizziness. However, these predictors are only able to identify those at risk of experiencing PCS and require further examination. More recent research has suggested the assessment of eye movement in this population. Longer fixations indicate that more information is being gathered, specifically the final fixation on a target/object, referred to as Quiet Eye (QE), prior to making a response. PURPOSE: To assess whether gaze behaviour is related to performance on a choice reaction time (CRT) task in non-concussed (NC) individuals and individuals with PCS (PCS). HYPOTHESES: Individuals with PCS will display greater Response Time (RT), decreased accuracy, and different gaze behaviour compared to NC. METHODS: Twenty-one non-concussed individuals (24 ± 2 years) and 9 individuals with PCS (23 ± 2 years) were tested. All participants were asked to complete a CRT task in the form of an iPad application, which measured each individual’s response time (RT) to a decision-making task during two blocks of trials while wearing a head-mounted Eye Tracker system. RESULTS: Mean RT was significantly greater (slower) (p < .01) in the PCS group compared to the non-concussed group at both blocks (Block 1: PCS µ = 0.96s, s = 0.13s, NC: µ = 0.75s, s = 0.18s; Block 2: PCS µ = 0.90s, s = 0.16s, NC: µ = 0.72s, s = 0.17s). Overall task accuracy, measured as percent correct, was also significantly lower in PCS (µ = 0.53, s = 0.03) compared to NC (µ = 0.58, sE = 0.03). Final QE duration was significantly longer (p < .05) in NC compared to PCS at block 1 (NC: µ = 0.234, s = 0.140; PCS: µ = 0.068, s = 0.139) and 2 (NC: µ = 0.221, s = 0.136; PCS: µ = 0.069, s = 0.136), indicating that fundamental levels of cognitive processing may be hindering decision-making abilities in the PCS population. CONCLUSION: Individuals with PCS are unable to demonstrate similar RT scores compared to non-concussed individuals at rest. Higher levels of cognitive processing, assessed through gaze behaviour, may explain this difference in response time and should be further considered a predictor of the onset of PCS.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicTraumatic Brain Injury Research→French-language works237,207→