Protocol for the Reconstructing Consciousness and Cognition (ReCCognition) Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Important scientific and clinical questions persist about general anesthesia despite the ubiquitous clinical use of anesthetic drugs in humans since their discovery. For example, it is not known how the brain reconstitutes consciousness and cognition after the profound functional perturbation of the anesthetized state, nor has a specific pattern of functional recovery been characterized. To date, there has been a lack of detailed investigation into rates of recovery and the potential orderly return of attention, sensorimotor function, memory, reasoning and logic, abstract thinking, and processing speed. Moreover, whether such neurobehavioral functions display an invariant sequence of return across individuals is similarly unknown. To address these questions, we designed a study of healthy volunteers undergoing general anesthesia with electroencephalography and serial testing of cognitive functions (NCT01911195). The aims of this study are to characterize the temporal patterns of neurobehavioral recovery over the first several hours following termination of a deep inhaled isoflurane general anesthetic and to identify common patterns of cognitive function recovery. Additionally, we will conduct spectral analysis and reconstruct functional networks from electroencephalographic data to identify any neural correlates (e.g., connectivity patterns, graph-theoretical variables) of cognitive recovery after the perturbation of general anesthesia. To accomplish these objectives, we will enroll a total of 60 consenting adults aged 20-40 across the three participating sites. Half of the study subjects will receive general anesthesia slowly titrated to loss of consciousness (LOC) with an intravenous infusion of propofol and thereafter be maintained for 3 h with 1.3 age adjusted minimum alveolar concentration of isoflurane, while the other half of subjects serves as awake controls to gauge effects of repeated neurobehavioral testing, spontaneous fatigue and endogenous rest-activity patterns.
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 | 0.011 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.106 | 0.038 |
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".