Unclear outcomes of heart rate variability following a concussion: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: : To systematically regroup articles that were published since the latest systematic search, but with specific inclusion criteria to help comparison that will offer a focused presentation of methods and results. This will offer a full overview of HRV's behavior at rest and during exercise in adults post-concussion. METHODS: : The systematic review was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) method. A computer-based systematic search was conducted in December 2019 through the Pubmed, Scopus and SPORTDiscus databases. A manual search was performed through the reference list of all articles retained. The reliability of the systematic search was assured by having the article selection process entirely repeated by a second author. RESULTS: : The systematic search yielded a total of 15 articles to be further analyzed. Results show impairment of HRV during exercise for individuals with concussion, heterogenous studies with lack of control over confounding factors and only less than half of the results showing a significant difference between individuals with concussion and controls. CONCLUSION: : Further research should try standardizing HRV measurement protocols that control confounding factors to allow easier comparison between studies and allows the possibility for an eventual meta-analysis.
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 | 0.009 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".