Quantitative EEG Correlates with NIHSS and MoCA for Assessing the Initial Stroke Severity in Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) measure stroke severity by assessing the functional and cognitive outcome, respectively. However, they cannot be used to measure subtle evolution in clinical symptoms during the early phase. Quantitative EEG (qEEG) can detect any subtle changes in CBF and brain metabolism thus may also benefit for assessing the severity. AIM: This study aims to identify the correlation between qEEG with NIHSS and MoCA for assessing the initial stroke severity in acute ischemic stroke patients. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study. We recruited 30 patients with first-ever acute ischemic stroke hospitalized in Dr. Sardjito General Hospital, Yogyakarta, Indonesia. We measured the NIHSS, MoCA score, and qEEG parameter during the acute phase of stroke. Correlation and regression analysis was completed to investigate the relationship between qEEG parameter with NIHSS and MoCA. RESULTS: Four acute qEEG parameter demonstrated moderate-to-high correlations with NIHSS and MoCA. DTABR had positive correlation with NIHSS (r = 0.379, p = 0.04). Meanwhile, delta-absolute power, DTABR, and DAR were negatively correlated with MoCA score (r = −0.654, p = 0.01; r = −0.397, p = 0.03; and r = −0.371, p = 0.04, respectively). After adjusted with the confounding variables, delta-absolute power was independently associated with MoCA score, but not with NIHSS (B = −2.887, 95% CI (−4.304–−1.470), p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Several qEEG parameters had significant correlations with NIHSS and MoCA in acute ischemic stroke patients. The use of qEEG in acute clinical setting may provide a reliable and efficient prediction of initial stroke severity. Further cohort study with larger sample size and wide range of stroke severity is still needed.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".