MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904603801 · doi:10.1089/neu.2018.6340

Multi-Directional Dynamic Model for Traumatic Brain Injury Detection

2019· preprint· en· W2904603801 on OpenAlexaff
Kaveh Laksari, Michael Fanton, Lyndia C. Wu, Taylor H. Nguyen, Mehmet Kurt, Chiara Giordano, Eoin Kelly, Eoin O’Keeffe, Eugene Wallace, Colin P. Doherty, Matthew Campbell, Stephen Tiernan, Gerald A. Grant, Jesse Ruan, Saeed Barbat, David B. Camarillo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurotrauma · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutomotive and Human Injury Biomechanics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
KeywordsKinematicsAngular accelerationTraumatic brain injuryCoronal planeDisplacement (psychology)AccelerationMetric (unit)Computer scienceDiffuse axonal injuryCorpus callosumSimulationPhysicsEngineeringMedicinePsychologyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given the worldwide adverse impact of traumatic brain injury (TBI) on the human population, its diagnosis and prediction are of utmost importance. Historically, many studies have focused on associating head kinematics to brain injury risk. Recently, there has been a push toward using computationally expensive finite element (FE) models of the brain to create tissue deformation metrics of brain injury. Here, we develop a new brain injury metric, the brain angle metric (BAM), based on the dynamics of a 3 degree-of-freedom lumped parameter brain model. The brain model is built based on the measured natural frequencies of an FE brain model simulated with live human impact data. We show that it can be used to rapidly estimate peak brain strains experienced during head rotational accelerations that cause mild TBI. In our data set, the simplified model correlates with peak principal FE strain (R2 = 0.82). Further, coronal and axial brain model displacement correlated with fiber-oriented peak strain in the corpus callosum (R2 = 0.77). Our proposed injury metric BAM uses the maximum angle predicted by our brain model and is compared against a number of existing rotational and translational kinematic injury metrics on a data set of head kinematics from 27 clinically diagnosed injuries and 887 non-injuries. We found that BAM performed comparably to peak angular acceleration, translational acceleration, and angular velocity in classifying injury and non-injury events. Metrics that separated time traces into their directional components had improved model deviance compare with those that combined components into a single time trace magnitude. Our brain model can be used in future work to rapidly approximate the peak strain resulting from mild to moderate head impacts and to quickly assess brain injury risk.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.261 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurotraumaSame topicAutomotive and Human Injury BiomechanicsFrench-language works237,207