TO STUDY THE ROLE AND EFFICACY OF NEUROHYPERBARIC OXYGEN THERAPY IN PATIENTS WITH HEAD INJURY IN A TERTIARY CARE HOSPITAL.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a major health problem worldwide, resulting in signicant morbidity, mortality and the survivors are often left with cognitive and behavioural disabilities. Various treatment options in TBI are focussed on altering the secondary brain injury. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) is one such adjunctive treatments for TBI, which addresses the TBI induced ischemia and hypoxia. The present study was conducted to assess the role and efcacy of HBOT in patients with head injury mainly in terms of improvement of consciousness and cognitive functions. The study also assessed the level of disability and the level of recovery in patients with traumatic brain injury, immediately post therapy. A total of 120 patients with mild and moderate TBI were included in the present study, 60 patients each in the study or HBOT group and the control group. Depending upon the clinical and radiological ndings of the patients, the HBOT/study group received medical management and HBOT, whereas the control group received only medical management. The improvement in level of consciousness was assessed by Glasgow coma scale (GCS) score, Full outline of Unresponsiveness (FOUR) score. The level of cognitive improvement is assessed by the Ranchos Los Amigos scale and Montreal Cognitive assessment score. The level of disability was assessed by Disability Rating Scale (DRS) and the level of recovery was assessed by Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) and Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended (GOS-E) The HBOT group showed signicant improvement in the level of consciousness when compared to the control group. In terms of cognitive improvement, mixed results were obtained. However, there was no signicant difference in the level of disability and recovery post therapy in both the groups.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".