Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34356134›Full record

ArticleBrain sciences2021

Quantitative Evaluation of Task-Induced Neurological Outcome after Stroke.

Iqram Hussain, Se-Jin Park

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
9.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

47 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 89 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Quantitative electroencephalography (qEEG), apolipoprotein A-I (APOA-I), and apolipoprotein epsilon 4 (APOE ɛ4) alleles for the diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Iqram HussainCenter for Medical Convergence Metrology, Korea Research Institute of Standards and Science, Daejeon 34113, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-5183-7631
Se-Jin ParkCenter for Medical Convergence Metrology, Korea Research Institute of Standards and Science, Daejeon 34113, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-1618-5906
Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute · KR

Funding

National Research Council of Science and Technology CRC-15-05-ETRI
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Electroencephalography (EEG) can access ischemic stroke-derived cortical impairment and is believed to be a prospective predictive method for acute stroke prognostics, neurological outcome, and post-stroke rehabilitation management. This study aims to quantify EEG features to understand task-induced neurological declines due to stroke and evaluate the biomarkers to distinguish the ischemic stroke group and the healthy adult group. We investigated forty-eight stroke patients (average age 72.2 years, 62% male) admitted to the rehabilitation center and seventy-five healthy adults (average age 77 years, 31% male) with no history of known neurological diseases. EEG was recorded through frontal, central, temporal, and occipital cortical electrodes (Fz, C1, C2, T7, T8, Oz) using wireless EEG devices and a newly developed data acquisition platform within three months after the appearance of symptoms of ischemic stroke (clinically confirmed). Continuous EEG data were recorded during the consecutive resting, motor (walking and working activities), and cognitive reading tasks. The statistical results showed that alpha, theta, and delta activities are biomarkers classifying the stroke patients and the healthy adults in the motor and cognitive states. DAR and DTR of the stroke group differed significantly from those of the healthy control group during the resting, motor, and cognitive tasks. Using the machine-learning approach, the C5.0 model showed 78% accuracy for the resting state, 89% accuracy in the functional motor walking condition, 84% accuracy in the working condition, and 85% accuracy in the cognitive reading state for classification the stroke group and the control group. This study is expected to be helpful for post-stroke treatment and post-stroke recovery.

Indexed as

electroencephalographymachine-learningneurological workloadneurosciencestroke

Identifiers

PMID34356134
PMCPMC8307254
OpenAlexW3178835531

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.