MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281699914 · doi:10.1093/braincomms/fcac132

Longitudinal changes of white matter microstructure following traumatic brain injury in U.S. military service members

2022· article· en· W4281699914 on OpenAlexaff
Ping‐Hong Yeh, Sara M. Lippa, Tracey A. Brickell, John Ollinger, Louis M. French, Rael T. Lange

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain Communications · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaOntario Centre of Excellence for Child and Youth Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTraumatic brain injuryDiffusion MRIWhite matterMedicineTraumatic injuryVoxelCerebrumMagnetic resonance imagingPsychologyInternal medicineSurgeryRadiologyPsychiatryCentral nervous system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The purpose of this study was to analyze quantitative diffusion tensor imaging measures across the spectrum of traumatic brain injury severity and evaluate their trajectories in military service members. Participants were 96 U.S. military service members and veterans who had sustained a mild traumatic brain injury [including complicated mild traumatic brain injury (n = 16) and uncomplicated mild traumatic brain injury (n = 68)], moderate-severe traumatic brain injury (n = 12), and controls (with or without orthopaedic injury, n = 39). All participants had been scanned at least twice, with some receiving up to five scans. Both whole brain voxel-wise analysis and tract-of-interest analysis were applied to assess the group differences of diffusion tensor imaging metrics, and their trajectories between time points of scans and days since injury. Linear mixed modelling was applied to evaluate cross-sectional and longitudinal diffusion tensor imaging metrics changes within and between groups using both tract-of-interest and voxel-wise analyses. Participants with moderate to severe traumatic brain injury had larger white matter disruption both in superficial subcortical and deep white matter, mainly over the anterior part of cerebrum, than those with mild traumatic brain injury, both complicated and uncomplicated, and there was no evidence of recovery over the period of follow-ups in moderate-severe traumatic brain injury, but deterioration was possible. Participants with mild traumatic brain injury had white matter microstructural changes, mainly in deep central white matter over the posterior part of cerebrum, with more spatial involvement in complicated mild traumatic brain injury than in uncomplicated mild traumatic brain injury and possible brain repair through neuroplasticity, e.g. astrocytosis with glial processes and glial scaring. Our results did not replicate ‘V-shaped’ trajectories in diffusion tensor imaging metrics, which were revealed in a previous study assessing the sub-acute stage of brain injury in service members and veterans following military combat concussion. In addition, non-traumatic brain injury controls, though not demonstrating any evidence of sustaining a traumatic brain injury, might have transient white matter changes with recovery afterward. Our results suggest that white matter integrity following a remote traumatic brain injury may change as a result of different underlying mechanisms at the microstructural level, which can have a significant consequence on the long-term well beings of service members and veterans. In conclusion, longitudinal diffusion tensor imaging improves our understanding of the mechanisms of white matter microstructural changes across the spectrum of traumatic brain injury severity. The quantitative metrics can be useful as guidelines in monitoring the long-term recovery.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.084
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain CommunicationsSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207