Assessment of Oculomotor Function in Patients With Postconcussion Syndrome: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Concussion and its associated sequel, postconcussion syndrome (PCS), have a debilitating impact on the lives of concussed patients. However, a diagnostic biomarker for this condition is lacking. Recently, there has been a surge of interest in using oculomotor function testing as an objective assessment of patients with PCS. OBJECTIVES: To systematically synthesize, appraise, and summarize all published empirical studies that have assessed alteration of oculomotor functions in patients with PCS. METHODS: Medline, Embase, PsychINFO, and CINAHL databases searched up to July 2016 for studies that used oculomotor function assessment in patients with postconcussion symptoms. RESULTS: The search identified 1637 citations, and finally 8 case-control studies were included. Of these, 5 studies used a similar task with a target moving in a circular trajectory. Three other studies measured conventional oculomotor tasks such as saccade, vergence, and smooth pursuit eye movements. CONCLUSIONS: Currently, there is limited support for the recommendation of oculomotor function assessments for diagnosis and identification of patients with PCS following head trauma. Therefore, more rigorous studies assessing oculomotor function changes in patients with PCS are warranted.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".