Outcome Prediction in Unresponsive Wakefulness Syndrome and Minimally Conscious State by Non-linear Dynamic Analysis of the EEG
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the role of non-linear dynamic analysis (NDA) of the electroencephalogram (EEG) in predicting patient outcome in unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (UWS) and minimally conscious state (MCS). Methods: This was a prospective longitudinal cohort study. A total of 98 and 64 UWS and MCS cases, respectively, were assessed. During admission, EEGs were acquired under eyes-closed and pain stimulation conditions. EEG nonlinear indices, including approximate entropy (ApEn) and cross-ApEn, were calculated. The modified Glasgow Outcome Scale (mGOS) was employed to assess functional prognosis 1 year following brain injury. Results: The mGOS scores were improved in 25 (26%) patients with UWS and 42 (66%) with MCS. Under the painful stimulation condition, both non-linear indices were lower in patients with UWS than in those with MCS. The frontal region, periphery of the primary sensory area (S1), and forebrain structure might be the key points modulating disorders of consciousness. The affected local cortical networks connected to S1 and unaffected distant cortical networks connecting S1 to the prefrontal area played important roles in mGOS score improvement. Conclusions: NDA provides an objective assessment of cortical excitability and interconnections of residual cortical functional islands. The impaired interconnection of the residual cortical functional island meant a poorer prognosis. The activation in the affected periphery of the S1 and the increase in the interconnection of affected local cortical areas around the S1 and unaffected S1 to the prefrontal and temporal areas meant a relatively favorable prognosis.
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".