Connectomic markers of symptom severity in sport-related concussion: Whole-brain analysis of resting-state fMRI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Concussion is associated with significant adverse effects within the first week post-injury, including physical complaints and altered cognition, sleep and mood. It is currently unknown whether these subjective disturbances have reliable functional brain correlates. Resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rs-fMRI) has been used to measure functional connectivity of individuals after traumatic brain injury, but less is known about the relationship between functional connectivity and symptom assessments after a sport concussion. In this study, rs-fMRI was used to evaluate whole-brain functional connectivity for seventy (70) university-level athletes, including 35 with acute concussion and 35 healthy matched controls. Univariate analyses showed that greater symptom severity was mainly associated with lower pairwise connectivity in frontal, temporal and insular regions, along with higher connectivity in a sparser set of cerebellar regions. A novel multivariate approach also extracted two components that showed reliable covariation with symptom severity: (1) a network of frontal, temporal and insular regions where connectivity was negatively correlated with symptom severity (replicating the univariate findings); and (2) a network with anti-correlated elements of the default-mode network and sensorimotor system, where connectivity was positively correlated with symptom severity. These findings support the presence of connectomic signatures of symptom complaints following a sport-related concussion, including both increased and decreased functional connectivity within distinct functional brain networks.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".