ReviewNeuroImage. Clinical2015
Risk, diagnostic error, and the clinical science of consciousness.
Review in NeuroImage. Clinical, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prediction models for functional outcomes in prolonged disorders of consciousness: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Pooled it
- A thalamic perspective of (un)consciousness in pharmacological and pathological states in humans.Brain communications · 2026Article
- Functional neuroimaging in disorders of consciousness: towards clinical implementation.Brain : a journal of neurology · 2025Review
- Impact of Aphasia on Brain Activation to Motor Commands in Patients with Acute Intracerebral Hemorrhage.Neurocritical care · 2025Article
- Clinical Implementation of fMRI and EEG to Detect Cognitive Motor Dissociation: Lessons Learned in an Acute Care Hospital.Neurology. Clinical practice · 2025Article
- Explaining recovery from coma with multimodal neuroimaging.Journal of neurology · 2024Observational
- Cognitive Motor Dissociation in Disorders of Consciousness.The New England journal of medicine · 2024Article
- Disclosing Results of Tests for Covert Consciousness: A Framework for Ethical Translation.Neurocritical care · 2024Review
- Article
- Ethical Considerations in Clinical Trials for Disorders of Consciousness.Brain sciences · 2022Article
- Assessing awareness in severe Alzheimer's disease.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2022Article
- The Timecourse of Electrophysiological Brain-Heart Interaction in DoC Patients.Brain sciences · 2021Article
- Pain Perception in Disorder of Consciousness: A Scoping Review on Current Knowledge, Clinical Applications, and Future Perspective.Brain sciences · 2021Article
- The Potential Role of fNIRS in Evaluating Levels of Consciousness.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2021Article
- Joint Neuropsychological Assessment through Coma/Near Coma and Level of Cognitive Functioning Assessment Scales Reduces Negative Findings in Pediatric Disorders of Consciousness.Brain sciences · 2020Article
- Peri-Personal Space Tracing by Hand-Blink Reflex Modulation in Patients with Chronic Disorders of Consciousness.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Brain network motif topography may predict emergence from disorders of consciousness: a case series.Neuroscience of consciousness · 2020Article
- The Trace Conditional Learning of the Noxious Stimulus in UWS Patients and Its Prognostic Value in a GSR and HRV Entropy Study.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2020Article
- Assessing Time-Resolved fNIRS for Brain-Computer Interface Applications of Mental Communication.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2020Article
- Neuroscience and Brain Death Controversies: The Elephant in the Room.Journal of religion and health · 2018Article
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
In recent years, a number of new neuroimaging techniques have detected covert awareness in some patients previously thought to be in a vegetative state/unresponsive wakefulness syndrome. This raises worries for patients, families, and physicians, as it indicates that the existing diagnostic error rate in this patient group is higher than assumed. Recent research on a subset of these techniques, called active paradigms, suggests that false positive and false negative findings may result from applying different statistical methods to patient data. Due to the nature of this research, these errors may be unavoidable, and may draw into question the use of active paradigms in the clinical setting. We argue that false positive and false negative findings carry particular moral risks, which may bear on investigators' decisions to use certain methods when independent means for estimating their clinical utility are absent. We review and critically analyze this methodological problem as it relates to both fMRI and EEG active paradigms. We conclude by drawing attention to three common clinical scenarios where the risk of diagnostic error may be most pronounced in this patient group.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.