Resting-State Electroencephalography Functional Connectivity Networks Relate to Pre- and Postoperative Language Functioning in Low-Grade Glioma and Meningioma Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Preservation of language functioning in patients undergoing brain tumor surgery is essential because language impairments negatively impact the quality of life. Brain tumor patients have alterations in functional connectivity (FC), the extent to which brain areas functionally interact. We studied FC networks in relation to language functioning in glioma and meningioma patients. Method: Patients with a low-grade glioma (N = 15) or meningioma (N = 10) infiltrating into/pressing on the language-dominant hemisphere underwent extensive language testing before and 1 year after surgery. Resting-state EEG was registered preoperatively, postoperatively (glioma patients only), and once in healthy individuals. After analyzing FC in theta and alpha frequency bands, weighted networks and Minimum Spanning Trees were quantified by various network measures. Results: Pre-operative FC network characteristics did not differ between glioma patients and healthy individuals. However, hub presence and higher local and global FC are associated with poorer language functioning before surgery in glioma patients and predict worse language performance at 1 year after surgery. For meningioma patients, a greater small worldness was related to worse language performance and hub presence; better average clustering and global integration were predictive of worse outcome on language function 1 year after surgery. The average eccentricity, diameter and tree hierarchy seem to be the network metrics with the more pronounced relation to language performance. Discussion: In this exploratory study, we demonstrated that preoperative FC networks are informative for pre- and postoperative language functioning in glioma patients and to a lesser extent in meningioma patients.
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 | 0.000 | 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".