MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3202604429 · doi:10.3389/fneur.2021.726425

Systematic Review of the Long-Term Neuroimaging Correlates of Mild Traumatic Brain Injury and Repetitive Head Injuries

2021· review· en· W3202604429 on OpenAlexaff
Holly V. Echlin, Alma Rahimi, Magdalena Wójtowicz

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neurology · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuroimagingPsycINFOTraumatic brain injuryPopulationMedicinePoison controlPsychologyClinical psychologyMEDLINEPsychiatryMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: To systematically review the literature on the long-term neuroimaging findings (≥10 years from exposure) for exposure in adulthood to mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) and repetitive head impacts (RHIs) using neuroimaging across all available populations. Data sources: Four electronic databases: MEDLINE, SPORTDiscus, PsycINFO, and EMBASE. Study selection: All articles were original research and published in English. Studies examined adults with remote exposure to mTBI and/or RHIs from ten or more years ago in addition to any associated neuroimaging findings. Data extraction: Parameters mainly included participants' population, age, years since head injury, race, sex, education level, and any neuroimaging findings. Scores for the level of evidence and risk of bias were calculated independently by two authors. Results: 5,521 studies were reviewed, of which 34 met inclusion criteria and were included in this study. The majority of adults in these studies showed positive neuroimaging findings one or more decades following mTBI/RHI exposure. This was consistent across study populations (i.e., veterans, athletes, and the general population). There was evidence for altered protein deposition patterns, micro- and macro-structural, functional, neurochemical, and blood flow-related differences in the brain for those with remote mTBI/RHI exposure. Conclusion: Findings from these studies suggest that past mTBI/RHI exposure may be associated with neuroimaging findings. However, given the methodological constraints related to relatively small sample sizes and the heterogeneity in injury types/exposure and imaging techniques used, conclusions drawn from this review are limited. Well-designed longitudinal studies with multimodal imaging and in-depth health and demographic information will be required to better understand the potential for having positive neuroimaging findings following remote mTBI/RHI.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.005
Bibliometrics0.0180.018
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.315 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeurologySame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207