MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7133025610

Functional neuroanatomy of sustained attention and exogenous alerting following naturalistic recovery from moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury

2005· dissertation· W7133025610 on OpenAlexaff
Nadine Marie Richard

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2005
Typedissertation
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsBank of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTraumatic brain injuryNeuroplasticityPrefrontal cortexDorsolateral prefrontal cortexBrain stimulationAttentional controlPosterior parietal cortex
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sustained attention (SA) refers to the endogenous ("top-down") control of attentional resources to implement goal-directed behaviour over time. SA relies on a right-lateralized frontal-thalamic-parietal brain network, with dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) as the primary substrate for supervisory control. Traumatic brain injury (TBI) causes frontal damage and SA deficits. Neuroplastic mechanisms and/or the existence of alternate (degenerate) systems offer possible routes for recovery of endogenous control, with the additional possibility of attentional re-engagment though exogenous ("bottom-up") stimulation (e.g. via alerting tones). This fMRI study revealed recovered sustained attention in five patients who sustained significant TBI at least one year ago. Rather than right DLPFC, patients activated right ventrolateral and medial PFC including anterior cingulate. Thalamic and parietal SA network components were preserved. In contrast to control subjects, alerting cues did not reduce "top-down" activations in TBI patients. These findings suggest that sustained attention in patients recovered from TBI is mediated by alternate prefrontal regions.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.313 · 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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicTraumatic Brain Injury Research→French-language works237,207→