MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412956448 · doi:10.3390/ani15152285

Quantitative Variables Derived from the Electroencephalographic Signal to Assess Depth of Anaesthesia in Animals: A Narrative Review

2025· review· en· W4412956448 on OpenAlexaff
Susanne Figueroa, Olivier Levionnois, Alessandro Mirra

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimals · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Pharmacology and Anesthesia
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectroencephalographyContext (archaeology)Bispectral indexSedationMedicinePsychologyAnesthesiaComputer scienceNeuroscienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurately assessing the depth of anaesthesia in animals remains a challenge, as traditional monitoring methods fail to capture subtle changes in brain activity. This review aimed to systematically map and critically evaluate the range of quantitative variables derived from electroencephalography (EEG) used to monitor sedation or anaesthesia in live animals, excluding laboratory rodents, over the past 35 years. Studies were identified through comprehensive searches in major biomedical databases (PubMed, Embase, CAB Abstract). To be included, studies had to report EEG use in relation to anaesthesia or sedation in living animals. A total of 169 studies were selected after screening and data extraction. Information was charted by animal species and reported EEG-derived variables. The most frequently reported variables were spectral edge frequencies, spectral power metrics, suppression ratio, and proprietary indices, such as the Bispectral Index. Methodological variability was high, and no consensus emerged on optimal EEG measures across species. While EEG-derived quantitative variables provide valuable insights, their interpretation remains highly context-dependent. Further research is necessary to refine these methods, explore variable combinations, and improve their clinical relevance in veterinary medicine.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.673
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.174
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimalsSame topicVeterinary Pharmacology and AnesthesiaFrench-language works237,207