Executive Dysfunction after a Sport-Related Concussion Is Independent of Task-Based Symptom Burden
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A sport-related concussion (SRC) results in short- and long-term deficits in oculomotor control; however, it is unclear whether this change reflects executive dysfunction and/or a performance decrement caused by an increase in task-based symptom burden. Here, individuals with a SRC - and age- and sex-matched controls - completed an antisaccade task (i.e., saccade mirror-symmetrical to a target) during the early (initial assessment ≤12 days) and later (follow-up assessment <30 days) stages of recovery. Antisaccades were used because they require top-down executive control and exhibit performance decrements following an SRC. Reaction time (RT) and directional errors were included with pupillometry, because pupil size in the antisaccade task has been shown to provide a neural proxy for executive control. In addition, the Sport-Concussion Assessment Tool (SCAT-5) symptom checklist was completed prior to and after each oculomotor assessment to identify a possible task-based increase in symptomology. The SRC group yielded longer initial assessment RTs, more directional errors, and larger task-evoked pupil dilations (TEPD) than the control group. At the follow-up assessment, RTs for the SRC and control group did not reliably differ; however, the former demonstrated more directional errors and larger TEPDs. SCAT-5 symptom severity scores did not vary from the pre- to post-oculomotor evaluation for either initial or follow-up assessments. Accordingly, an SRC imparts a persistent executive dysfunction to oculomotor planning independent of a task-based increase in symptom burden. These findings evince that antisaccades serve as an effective tool to identify subtle executive deficits during the early and later stages of SRC recovery.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".