Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35095725›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neurology2021

Diagnostic Developments in Differentiating Unresponsive Wakefulness Syndrome and the Minimally Conscious State.

Camillo Porcaro, Idan Efim Nemirovsky, Francesco Riganello, Zahra Mansour, Antonio Cerasa, Paolo Tonin, Bobby Stojanoski, Andrea Soddu

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in neurology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
7.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. [Brain-computer interface technology and its applications for patients with disorders of consciousness].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2025
    Review
  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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Camillo PorcaroDepartment of Neuroscience and Padova Neuroscience Center (PNC), University of Padova, Padova, Italy.
Idan Efim NemirovskyDepartment of Physics and Astronomy, Brain and Mind Institute, University of Western Ontario, London, ON, Canada.
Francesco RiganelloSant'Anna Institute and Research in Advanced Neurorehabilitation (RAN), Crotone, Italy.
Zahra MansourDepartment of Information Engineering, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy.
Antonio CerasaSant'Anna Institute and Research in Advanced Neurorehabilitation (RAN), Crotone, Italy.
Paolo ToninSant'Anna Institute and Research in Advanced Neurorehabilitation (RAN), Crotone, Italy.
Bobby StojanoskiFaculty of Social Science and Humanities, University of Ontario Institute of Technology, Oshawa, ON, Canada.
Andrea SodduDepartment of Physics and Astronomy, Brain and Mind Institute, University of Western Ontario, London, ON, Canada.
Western University · CAIstituto S.Anna Crotone · ITInstitute for Biomedical Research and Innovation · ITInstitute of Cognitive Sciences and Technologies · ITMarche Polytechnic University · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When treating patients with a disorder of consciousness (DOC), it is essential to obtain an accurate diagnosis as soon as possible to generate individualized treatment programs. However, accurately diagnosing patients with DOCs is challenging and prone to errors when differentiating patients in a Vegetative State/Unresponsive Wakefulness Syndrome (VS/UWS) from those in a Minimally Conscious State (MCS). Upwards of ~40% of patients with a DOC can be misdiagnosed when specifically designed behavioral scales are not employed or improperly administered. To improve diagnostic accuracy for these patients, several important neuroimaging and electrophysiological technologies have been proposed. These include Positron Emission Tomography (PET), functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI), Electroencephalography (EEG), and Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS). Here, we review the different ways in which these techniques can improve diagnostic differentiation between VS/UWS and MCS patients. We do so by referring to studies that were conducted within the last 10 years, which were extracted from the PubMed database. In total, 55 studies met our criteria (clinical diagnoses of VS/UWS from MCS as made by PET, fMRI, EEG and TMS- EEG tools) and were included in this review. By summarizing the promising results achieved in understanding and diagnosing these conditions, we aim to emphasize the need for more such tools to be incorporated in standard clinical practice, as well as the importance of data sharing to incentivize the community to meet these goals.

Indexed as

disorder of consciousness (DOC)functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI)magneto-electroencephalography (M-EEG)minimally conscious state (MCS)positron emission tomography (PET)transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS)unresponsiveness wakefulness syndrome (UWS)vegetative state (VS)

Identifiers

PMID35095725
PMCPMC8793804
OpenAlexW4205560181

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.