Assessment of Oculomotor Functions as a Biomarker in Mild Traumatic Brain Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI), or concussion, is a major public health problem, and ambiguity still exists regarding its diagnosis. While functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) has been identified as a helpful screening tool for concussion, its limited accessibility in clinical or field settings necessitates a more efficient alternative. Oculomotor function deficit is an often-reported pathology in mTBI. Due to the neuroanatomical overlap between eye-movement circuitry and mTBI pathophysiology, visual deficits are expected. In this study, we investigate the possibility of using an oculomotor assessment tool for finding biomarkers in concussion. We used fMRI with tasks evaluating oculomotor functions: smooth pursuit (SP), saccades, anti-saccades, and optokinetic nystagmus (OKN). Before the scanning, the testing with a system of virtual reality goggles with integrated eye- and head-tracking was used where subjects performed the same tasks as those used in fMRI. Twenty-nine concussed symptomatic adults (CSA) within 1-month postconcussion and 29 age- and sex-matched healthy controls (HCS) were tested to examine blood oxygen level-dependent (BOLD) fMRI alterations associated with performances in oculomotor function after mTBI and evaluate the efficacy of the oculomotor assessment in detecting oculomotor and gaze deficits following mTBI. Comparing CSA with HCS, significant differences were observed in anti-saccades and OKN performance. CSA group exhibited elevated %BOLD signal change on each task compared with HCS: in the superior frontal gyrus during the smooth pursuit, inferior frontal gyrus during the saccades, putamen and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) during the anti-saccades, and lingual gyrus and IFG during the OKN. Key findings include the following: (1) oculomotor deficits in concussed subjects compared with controls, (2) abnormal activation patterns in areas related to the regulation and control of oculomotor movements, suggesting concussion-induced disruptions, and (3) the potential of oculomotor assessment as a promising approach for mTBI biomarkers, with anti-saccades and OKN identified as the most sensitive tasks.
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 | 0.001 | 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".