MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4397047682

Physiological Vibration Acceleration (Phybrata) Sensor Assessment of Multi-System Physiological Impairments and Sensory Reweighting Following Concussion

2020· article· en· W4397047682 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ralston JD, Ashok K. Raina, Benson BW, Peters RM, Roper JM, Ralston AB

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConcussionAccelerationSensory systemPhysical medicine and rehabilitationVibrationComputer scienceNeuroscienceMedicinePsychologyAcousticsPhysicsPoison controlMedical emergencyInjury prevention
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

John D Ralston,1 Ashutosh Raina,2,3 Brian W Benson,4,5 Ryan M Peters,6,7 Joshua M Roper,1 Andreas B Ralston1 1PROTXX, Inc., Menlo Park, CA 94025, USA; 2Center of Excellence for Pediatric Neurology, Rocklin, CA 95765, USA; 3Concussion Medical Clinic, Rocklin, CA 95765, USA; 4Benson Concussion Institute, Calgary, Alberta T3B 6B7, Canada; 5Canadian Sport Institute Calgary, Calgary, Alberta T3B 5R5, Canada; 6Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta T2N 1N4, Canada; 7Hotchkiss Brain Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta T2N 1N4, CanadaCorrespondence: John D Ralston Tel +1 6502158418Email john.ralston@protxx.comObjective: To assess the utility of a head-mounted wearable inertial motion unit (IMU)-based physiological vibration acceleration (“phybrata”) sensor to support the clinical diagnosis of concussion, classify and quantify specific concussion-induced physiological system impairments and sensory reweighting, and track individual patient recovery trajectories.Methods: Data were analyzed from 175 patients over a 12-month period at three clinical sites. Comprehensive clinical concussion assessments were first completed for all patients, followed by testing with the phybrata sensor. Phybrata time series data and spatial scatter plots, eyes open (Eo) and eyes closed (Ec) phybrata powers, average power (Eo+Ec)/2, Ec/Eo phybrata power ratio, time-resolved phybrata spectral density (TRPSD) distributions, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves are compared for individuals with no objective impairments and those clinically diagnosed with concussions and accompanying vestibular impairment, other neurological impairment, or both vestibular and neurological impairments. Finally, pre- and post-injury phybrata case report results are presented for a participant who was diagnosed with a concussion and subsequently monitored during treatment, rehabilitation, and return-to-activity clearance.Results: Phybrata data demonstrate distinct features and patterns for individuals with no discernable clinical impairments, diagnosed vestibular pathology, and diagnosed neurological pathology. ROC curves indicate that the average power (Eo+Ec)/2 may be utilized to support clinical diagnosis of concussion, while Eo and Ec/Eo may be utilized as independent measures to confirm accompanying neurological and vestibular impairments, respectively. All 3 measures demonstrate area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity above 90% for their respective diagnoses. Phybrata spectral analyses demonstrate utility for quantifying the severity of concussion-induced physiological impairments, sensory reweighting, and subsequent monitoring of improvements throughout treatment and rehabilitation.Conclusion: Phybrata testing assists with objective concussion diagnosis and provides an important adjunct to standard concussion assessment tools by objectively ascertaining neurological and vestibular impairments, guiding targeted rehabilitation strategies, monitoring recovery, and assisting with return-to-sport/work/learn decision-making.Keywords: wearable sensor, physiological vibration acceleration, concussion, multi-system impairment, sensory reweighting

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.435
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.540
GPT teacher head0.645
Teacher spread0.105 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicOccupational Health and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207