A pilot study exploring pupil response measurement in mild traumatic brain injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Pupillometry, the measurement of pupil response dynamics via the pupillary light reflex, is seldom used in the assessment of mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). We hypothesized that there would be quantifiable differences in detailed pupil response measurements in patients with acute and chronic mTBI. Methods: We conducted 49 bilateral pupillometry measurements, in acute mTBI patients at 1-week (N=11), 2-4w (N=9), and 3-7mo post-injury (N=3); 14 patients with persistent post-traumatic symptoms (PTS) once, and healthy controls across a first visit (N=7) and second visit 2-4w later (N=5). Results: The percentage of left pupil diameter change was significantly greater in the acute mTBI group at second visit (mean=36.3% (2.96)), compared to controls at second visit (mean=31.6% (4.39)) (F=5.87, p=0.0321). We did not identify significant differences between acute mTBI patients and controls at first visit, PTS patients versus controls, and within the acute mTBI group across three longitudinal visits. Conclusion: While these preliminary data suggest that pupillometry under these conditions does not distinguish between patients who had a recent mTBI or those with PTS and healthy controls, further research is warranted investigating pupil behavior and its clinical utility in mTBI.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".