ArticleFrontiers in neurology
"Can she hear me?"-Questions of experience and suffering in cognitive motor dissociation.
Article in Frontiers in neurology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Care for patients with disorders of consciousness (DoC) has been transformed by advanced neurotechnologies capable of detecting cognitive-motor dissociation (CMD)-volitional brain activity in patients who appear unresponsive on bedside examination. Recent evidence suggests that up to one in four patients diagnosed with unresponsive wakefulness syndrome may harbor covert consciousness, and that CMD is associated with significantly improved functional outcomes. These findings have challenged a longstanding therapeutic nihilism in the care of patients with DoC, and professional societies now recommend routine CMD assessment to inform advance care planning. However, the limitations of these technologies warrant careful consideration. This article examines the ethical implications of CMD detection from a neuropalliative care perspective. It argues that suffering in patients with DoC extends beyond nociception to encompass existential dimensions that are often overlooked, and that the presumption of consciousness should guide clinical care regardless of imaging findings. Furthermore, it proposes that advanced neurotechnologies should be deployed not only as diagnostic and prognostic tools, but as therapeutic instruments for communication, connection, and quality of life-benefits that hold value independent of functional recovery. As technological capabilities in consciousness detection advance, the ethical obligation to attend to the present experience of these patients deepens correspondingly.
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.