MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4304692050 · doi:10.1002/ana.26530

Functional Neuroimaging as an Assessment Tool in Critically Ill Patients

2022· article· en· W4304692050 on OpenAlexafffund
Loretta Norton, Karnig Kazazian, Teneille Gofton, Derek Debicki, Davinia Fernández‐Espejo, Jonathan E. Peelle, Eyad Al Thenayan, G. Bryan Young, Adrian M. Owen

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Neurology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsThe King's UniversityWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of CanadaLondon Health Sciences Centre
KeywordsFunctional magnetic resonance imagingFunctional neuroimagingNeuroimagingMinimally conscious statePersistent vegetative stateWakefulnessPsychologyConsciousness DisordersComa (optics)MedicineFunctional imagingCognitionNeural correlates of consciousnessLevel of consciousnessNeuroscienceConsciousnessDevelopmental psychologyElectroencephalography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Little is known about residual cognitive function in the earliest stages of serious brain injury. Functional neuroimaging has yielded valuable diagnostic and prognostic information in chronic disorders of consciousness, such as the vegetative state (also termed unresponsive wakefulness syndrome). The objective of the current study was to determine if functional neuroimaging could be efficacious in the assessment of cognitive function in acute disorders of consciousness, such as coma, where decisions about the withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies are often made. METHODS: A hierarchical functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) approach assessed sound perception, speech perception, language comprehension, and covert command following in 17 critically ill patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). RESULTS: Preserved auditory function was observed in 15 patients (88%), whereas 5 (29%) also had preserved higher-order language comprehension. Notably, one patient could willfully modulate his brain activity when instructed to do so, suggesting a level of covert conscious awareness that was entirely inconsistent with his clinical diagnosis at the time of the scan. Across patients, a positive relationship was also observed between fMRI responsivity and the level of functional recovery, such that patients with the greatest functional recovery had neural responses most similar to those observed in healthy control participants. INTERPRETATION: These results suggest that fMRI may provide important diagnostic and prognostic information beyond standard clinical assessment in acutely unresponsive patients, which may aid discussions surrounding the continuation or removal of life-sustaining therapies during the early post-injury period. ANN NEUROL 2023;93:131-141.

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)0.005
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.302 · 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

Citations43
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of NeurologySame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207