MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3203598446 · doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2018.07.001

Practice Guideline Update Recommendations Summary: Disorders of Consciousness

2018· article· en· W3203598446 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Joseph T. Giacino, Douglas I. Katz, Nicholas D. Schiff, John Whyte, Eric Ashman, Stephen Ashwal, Richard L. Barbano, Flora M. Hammond, Steven Laureys, Geoffrey Ling, Risa Nakase‐Richardson, Ronald T. Seel, Stuart A. Yablon, Thomas S.D. Getchius, Gary Gronseth, Melissa J. Armstrong

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDystonia CoalitionNational Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation ResearchNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesDefense Health AgencyDefense and Veterans Brain Injury CenterAdministration for Community LivingEuropean Academy of NeurologyIntuitive SurgicalFundação BialUnitedHealth GroupZoetisEuropean Space AgencySanofiGW PharmaceuticalsNational Institutes of HealthHealth Services Research and DevelopmentAmgenEdwards LifesciencesPfizerYork UniversityBiogenAbbVieEuropean CommissionU.S. Department of DefenseAllerganAstraZenecaMind Science FoundationU.S. Department of Veterans AffairsJames S. McDonnell FoundationU.S. Department of Health and Human ServicesAustralian Government
KeywordsMinimally conscious statePersistent vegetative stateMedicineComa (optics)GuidelineConsciousness DisordersLevel of consciousnessEtiologyEvidence-based medicineEvidence-based practiceIntensive care medicinePhysical therapyPsychiatryPsychologyConsciousnessAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To update the 1995 American Academy of Neurology (AAN) practice parameter on persistent vegetative state and the 2002 case definition on minimally conscious state (MCS) and provide care recommendations for patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness (DoC). METHODS: Recommendations were based on systematic review evidence, related evidence, care principles, and inferences using a modified Delphi consensus process according to the AAN 2011 process manual, as amended. RECOMMENDATIONS: Clinicians should identify and treat confounding conditions, optimize arousal, and perform serial standardized assessments to improve diagnostic accuracy in adults and children with prolonged DoC (Level B). Clinicians should counsel families that for adults, MCS (vs vegetative state [VS]/ unresponsive wakefulness syndrome [UWS]) and traumatic (vs nontraumatic) etiology are associated with more favorable outcomes (Level B). When prognosis is poor, long-term care must be discussed (Level A), acknowledging that prognosis is not universally poor (Level B). Structural MRI, SPECT, and the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised can assist prognostication in adults (Level B); no tests are shown to improve prognostic accuracy in children. Pain always should be assessed and treated (Level B) and evidence supporting treatment approaches discussed (Level B). Clinicians should prescribe amantadine (100-200 mg bid) for adults with traumatic VS/UWS or MCS (4-16 weeks post injury) to hasten functional recovery and reduce disability early in recovery (Level B). Family counseling concerning children should acknowledge that natural history of recovery, prognosis, and treatment are not established (Level B). Recent evidence indicates that the term chronic VS/UWS should replace permanent VS, with duration specified (Level B). Additional recommendations are included.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.063
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.063
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.007
Bibliometrics0.0060.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0130.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.012

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.359 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations268
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Physical Medicine and RehabilitationSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207