The Cardiac Autonomic Response Recovery to the Modified Tilt Test in Children Post Moderate–Severe Traumatic Brain Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the recovery of the cardiac autonomic control system (CACS) response to the modified tilt-test during rehabilitation, in children post moderate-severe TBI at the subacute phase post-injury. METHOD: Thirty-seven children aged 6-18 years, 14-162 days post moderate-severe TBI, participated in the study. The assessment included CACS values evaluation (heart rate (HR), heart rate variability (HRV) and blood pressure) during the modified tilt-test: five minutes lying supine and five minutes passive standing. Re-assessment was performed after eight weeks of rehabilitation. RESULTS: In both assessments, only four children reported symptoms associated with orthostatic intolerance during the modified tilt-test. No change was found over time in the HR and HRV values at rest. In response to the modified tilt-test, the systolic blood pressure showed change over time, with a significant interaction effect (p=0.04); while in the first assessment the SBP values showed a hypertension trend in the second assessment the SBP values showed a hypotension trend. CONCLUSIONS: Children post moderate-severe TBI at the sub-acute phase post-injury, have a better systolic blood pressure response during the modified tilt-test after eight weeks of individually tailored rehabilitation program, despite no change in the CACS values at rest. CLINICAL TRIAL GOV. NUMBER: NCT03215082.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".