ArticleFunctional neurology
The role of early electroclinical assessment in improving the evaluation of patients with disorders of consciousness.
Article in Functional neurology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Resting-State Electroencephalography for Prognosis in Disorders of Consciousness Following Traumatic Brain Injury.Frontiers in neurology · 2020Review
- Assessing learning as a possible sign of consciousness in post-coma persons with minimal responsiveness.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2014Article
- Eye movement measurement in diagnostic assessment of disorders of consciousness.Frontiers in neurology · 2014Review
- Clinical differentiation and outcome evaluation in vegetative and minimally conscious state patients:the neurophysiological approach.Functional neurologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We all share the need to optimise the evaluation of patients with disorders of consciousness (DOC), given the high rate of misdiagnosis of vegetative state based on clinical examination. We believe that one way to do this is to optimise assessment from the early stages, in order to reduce discontinuity between the hospital and rehabilitation phases. While clinical observation remains the "gold standard" for the diagnostic assessment of patients with DOC, neurophysiological investigations (electroencephalography, short latency evoked potentials and event-related potentials) could help to further understanding of the pathophysiology underlying the state of unresponsiveness, differentiate coma from other apparently similar conditions (i.e., locked-in and locked-in-like syndromes), and potentially integrate prognostic evaluation with monitoring of the evolution of the clinical state. Moreover, these techniques have the considerable advantage of being available at the bedside. Discontinuity between the hospital and rehabilitation phases is rightly considered to be one of the critical points in the assessment of patients with DOC. In our view, a continuum of expert neurological assessment that begins with monitoring of the acute phase (focusing on evolution of primary brain damage and secondary complications) and follows through to the patient's discharge from the intensive care unit (focusing on the pathophysiology of brain damage and prognostication based on clinical, neuroimaging and neurophysiological tests) could help to: i) optimise the rehabilitation programme according to the expectations of recovery; ii) provide a basis for comparison with subsequent periodic re-evaluations; iii) ensure uniformity of assessment regardless of the heterogeneity of care facilities; and iv) characterise a subset of patients who, showing discrepancies between neurophysiological tests and clinical status, are more likely to undergo unexpected recovery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
21693083PMC3814503What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.