GP.4 Can Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping Help Diagnose and Predict Recovery of Concussion in Children?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) is an MR sequence that has potential as a biomarker in concussion. We compared QSM in pediatric concussion patients versus a comparison group of children with orthopedic injuries (OI) and assessed QSM’s performance relative to the current clinical benchmark (5P risk score) for predicting persistent postconcussion symptoms (PPCS). Methods: Children (N=967) aged 8-16.99 years with either concussion or OI were prospectively recruited from 5 Canadian centers. Participants completed QSM at a post-acute assessment 2-33 days post-injury. QSM z-score metrics for 9 regions of interest (ROI) were derived from 371 children (concussion=255, OI=116). PPCS at 1-month post-injury was defined using reliable change methods. Results: The concussion and OI groups did not differ significantly in QSM across ROI. Increased frontal white matter (WM) susceptibility predicted reliable increases in parent-rated cognitive symptoms (p=0.001). Together, frontal WM susceptibility and the 5P risk score were better at predicting persistent cognitive symptoms than the 5P risk score alone (p=0.0021). AUC were 0.71(95%CI: 0.62-0.80) for frontal WM susceptibility, 0.67(95%CI: 0.56-0.78) for the 5P risk score, and 0.73(95%CI: 0.64-0.82) for both. Conclusions: This is the first study to demonstrate a potential imaging biomarker that predicts persistent symptoms in children with concussion compared to the current clinical benchmark.
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 | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".