MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2793127383 · doi:10.1097/wnr.0000000000000988

Three-dimensional multiple object tracking in the pediatric population

2018· article· en· W2793127383 on OpenAlexaff
Laurie‐Ann Corbin‐Berrigan, Kristina Kowalski, Jocelyn Faubert, Brian R. Christie, Isabelle Gagnon

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroreport · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsMontreal Children's HospitalUniversity of VictoriaUniversité de MontréalUniversity of CalgaryMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnalysis of variancePsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPopulationTraumatic brain injuryRepeated measures designPoison controlInjury preventionPerceptionAudiologyMedicineMedical emergencyPsychiatryNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) affects hundreds of thousands of children and their families each year, investigation of potential mTBI assessments and treatments is an important research target. Three-dimensional multiple object tracking (3D-MOT), where an individual must allocate attention to moving objects within 3D space, is one potentially promising assessment and treatment tool. To date, no research has looked at 3D-MOT in a pediatric mTBI population. Thus, the aim of this study was to examine 3D-MOT learning in children and youth with and without mTBI. Thirty-four participants (mean age=14.69±2.46 years), with and without mTBI, underwent six visits of 3D-MOT. A two-way repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed a significant time effect, a nonsignificant group effect, and a nonsignificant group-by-time interaction on absolute speed thresholds. In contrast, significant group and time effects and a significant group-by-time interaction on normalized speed thresholds were found. Individuals with mTBI showed smaller training gains at visit 2 than healthy controls, but the groups did not differ on the remaining visits. Although youth can significantly improve their 3D-MOT performance following mTBI, similar to noninjured individuals, they show slower speed of processing in the first few training sessions. This preliminary work suggests that using a 3D-MOT paradigm to train visual perception after mTBI may be beneficial for both stimulating recovery and informing return to activity decisions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations27
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroreportSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207