Neurophysiological markers of cognitive deficits and recovery in concussed adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The present study sought to determine: 1) whether concussed adolescents exhibited deficits in neurocognitive functioning as reflected by neurophysiological alterations; 2) if neurophysiological alterations could be linked to supplementary data such as the number of previous concussions and days since injury; and 3) if deficits in psychological health and behavioural tests increased during diagnosis duration. METHODS: Twenty-six concussed adolescents were compared to twenty-eight healthy controls with no prior concussions. Self-report inventories evaluated depressive and concussive symptomatology, while behavioral tests evaluated cognitive ability qualitatively. To assess neurophysiological markers of cognitive function, two separate auditory oddball tasks were employed: 1) an active oddball task measuring executive control and attention as reflected by the N2b and P300, respectively; and 2) a passive oddball task assessing the early, automatic pre-conscious awareness processes as reflected by the MMN. RESULTS: Concussed adolescents displayed delayed N2b and attenuated P300 responses relative to controls; showed elevated levels of depressive and concussive symptomatology; scored average-to- low-average in behavioral tests; and exhibited N2b response latencies that correlated with number of days since injury. CONCLUSION: These findings demonstrate that concussed adolescents exhibit clear deficiencies in neurocognitive function, and that N2b response latency may be a marker of concussion 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".