EEG spectral exponent as a synthetic index for the longitudinal assessment of stroke recovery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Quantitative Electroencephalography (qEEG) can capture changes in brain activity following stroke. qEEG metrics traditionally focus on oscillatory activity, however recent findings highlight the importance of aperiodic (power-law) structure in characterizing pathological brain states. We assessed neurophysiological alterations and recovery after mono-hemispheric stroke by means of the Spectral Exponent (SE), a metric that reflects EEG slowing and quantifies the power-law decay of the EEG Power Spectral Density (PSD). METHODS: Eighteen patients (n = 18) with mild to moderate mono-hemispheric Middle Cerebral Artery (MCA) ischaemic stroke were retrospectively enrolled for this study. Patients underwent EEG recording in the sub-acute phase (T0) and after 2 months of physical rehabilitation (T1). Sixteen healthy controls (HC; n = 16) matched by age and sex were enrolled as a normative group. SE values and narrow-band PSD were estimated for each recording. We compared SE and band-power between patients and HC, and between the affected (AH) and unaffected hemisphere (UH) at T0 and T1 in patients. RESULTS: At T0, stroke patients showed significantly more negative SE values than HC (p = 0.003), reflecting broad-band EEG slowing. Most important, in patients SE over the AH was consistently more negative compared to the UH and showed a renormalization at T1. This SE renormalization significantly correlated with National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) improvement (R = 0.63, p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: SE is a reliable readout of the neurophysiological and clinical alterations occurring after an ischaemic cortical lesion. SIGNIFICANCE: SE promise to be a robust method to monitor and predict patients' functional outcome.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".