Brain network motif topography may predict emergence from disorders of consciousness: a case series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neuroimaging methods have improved the accuracy of diagnosis in patients with disorders of consciousness (DOC), but novel, clinically translatable methods for prognosticating this population are still needed. In this case series, we explored the association between topographic and global brain network properties and prognosis in patients with DOC. We recorded high-density electroencephalograms in three patients with acute or chronic DOC, two of whom also underwent an anesthetic protocol. In these two cases, we compared functional network motifs, network hubs and power topography (i.e. topographic network properties), as well as relative power and graph theoretical measures (i.e. global network properties), at baseline, during exposure to anesthesia and after recovery from anesthesia. We also compared these properties to a group of healthy, conscious controls. At baseline, the topographic distribution of nodes participating in alpha motifs resembled conscious controls in patients who later recovered consciousness and high relative power in the delta band was associated with a negative outcome. Strikingly, the reorganization of network motifs, network hubs and power topography under anesthesia followed by their return to a baseline patterns upon recovery from anesthesia, was associated with recovery of consciousness. Our findings suggest that topographic network properties measured at the single-electrode level might provide more prognostic information than global network properties that are averaged across the brain network. In addition, we propose that the brain network's capacity to reorganize in response to a perturbation is a precursor to the recovery of consciousness in DOC patients.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".