Structural connectome differences in pediatric mild traumatic brain and orthopedic injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sophisticated network-based approaches such as structural connectomics may help to detect a biomarker of mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) in children. This study compared the structural connectome of children with mTBI or mild orthopedic injury (OI) to that of typically developing (TD) children. Children aged 8-16.99 years with mTBI (n = 83) or OI (n = 37) were recruited from the emergency department and completed 3T diffusion MRI 2-20 days postinjury. TD children (n = 39) were recruited from the community and completed diffusion MRI. Graph theory metrics were calculated for the binarized average fractional anisotropy among 90 regions. Multivariable linear regression and linear mixed effects models were used to compare groups, with covariates age, hemisphere, and sex, correcting for multiple comparisons. The two injury groups did not differ on graph theory metrics, but both differed from TD children in global metrics (local network efficiency: TD > OI, mTBI, d = 0.49; clustering coefficient: TD < OI, mTBI, d = 0.49) and regional metrics for the fusiform gyrus (lower degree centrality and nodal efficiency: TD > OI, mTBI, d = 0.80 to 0.96; characteristic path length: TD < OI, mTBI, d = -0.75 to -0.90) and in the superior and middle orbital frontal gyrus, paracentral lobule, insula, and thalamus (clustering coefficient: TD > OI, mTBI, d = 0.66 to 0.68). Both mTBI and OI demonstrated reduced global and regional network efficiency and segregation as compared to TD children. Findings suggest a general effect of childhood injury that could reflect pre- and postinjury factors that can alter brain structure. An OI group provides a more conservative comparison group than TD children for structural neuroimaging research in pediatric mTBI.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".