ArticleScientific reports2021
Decoding accelerometry for classification and prediction of critically ill patients with severe brain injury.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Short prescribed exercises can quantify upper limb functioning in neurodegenerative disease.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- TILTomorrow today: dynamic factors predicting changes in intracranial pressure treatment intensity after traumatic brain injury.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Accelerometer-derived movement features as predictive biomarkers for muscle atrophy in neurocritical care: a prospective cohort study.Critical care (London, England) · 2024Observational
- Emerging methods for measuring physical activity using accelerometry in children and adolescents with neuromotor disorders: a narrative review.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2024Review
- Mining the contribution of intensive care clinical course to outcome after traumatic brain injury.NPJ digital medicine · 2023Article
- Classification of Level of Consciousness in a Neurological ICU Using Physiological Data.Neurocritical care · 2023Observational
- The leap to ordinal: Detailed functional prognosis after traumatic brain injury with a flexible modelling approach.PloS one · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Our goal is to explore quantitative motor features in critically ill patients with severe brain injury (SBI). We hypothesized that computational decoding of these features would yield information on underlying neurological states and outcomes. Using wearable microsensors placed on all extremities, we recorded a median 24.1 (IQR: 22.8-25.1) hours of high-frequency accelerometry data per patient from a prospective cohort (n = 69) admitted to the ICU with SBI. Models were trained using time-, frequency-, and wavelet-domain features and levels of responsiveness and outcome as labels. The two primary tasks were detection of levels of responsiveness, assessed by motor sub-score of the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCSm), and prediction of functional outcome at discharge, measured with the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOSE). Detection models achieved significant (AUC: 0.70 [95% CI: 0.53-0.85]) and consistent (observation windows: 12 min-9 h) discrimination of SBI patients capable of purposeful movement (GCSm > 4). Prediction models accurately discriminated patients of upper moderate disability or better (GOSE > 5) with 2-6 h of observation (AUC: 0.82 [95% CI: 0.75-0.90]). Results suggest that time series analysis of motor activity yields clinically relevant insights on underlying functional states and short-term outcomes in patients with SBI.
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.