An Evidence-Based Objective Study Protocol for Evaluating Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Indices Following Concussion: The Neary Protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The prevalence and incidence of sport-related concussion have continued to increase over the past decade, and researchers from various backgrounds strive for evidenced-based clinical assessment and management. When diagnosing and managing a concussion, a battery of tests from several domains (e.g., symptom reporting, neurocognitive, physiology) must be used. In this study, we propose and develop an objective, evidence-based protocol to assess the pathophysiology of the brain by using non-invasive methods. METHODS: = 300) will be assessed at the beginning of the season in a healthy state to establish baseline values, and then prospectively followed if a mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) occurs on approximately days 1-2, 3-5, 7-10, 21, 30, and subsequently thereafter, depending on the severity of injury. The protocol includes spontaneous measurements at rest, during head postural change, controlled breathing maneuvers for cerebrovascular reactivity, a neurovascular coupling stimuli, and a baroreflex/autoregulation maneuver. Physiological data collection will include cerebral blood flow velocity, cerebral oxygenation, respiratory gases for end-tidal oxygen and carbon dioxide, finger photoplethysmography for blood pressure, seismocardiography for cardiac mechanics, and electrocardiography. Conclusion, Limitations, and Ethics: The protocol will provide an objective, physiological evidence-based approach in an attempt to better diagnose concussion to aid in return-to-play or -learn. Ethics approval has been granted by the University Research Ethics Board.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.025 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".