Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42780860›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neurology2026

From detection to decision: a conceptual framework of uncertainty migration in disorders of consciousness.

Fangting Wang, Yufei Xue, Haibo Di

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in neurology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Fangting WangInternational Institute for Vegetative State and Consciousness Science, Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou, China.
Yufei XueInternational Institute for Vegetative State and Consciousness Science, Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou, China.
Haibo DiInternational Institute for Vegetative State and Consciousness Science, Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate assessment of consciousness in patients with disorders of consciousness (DoC) remains a longstanding challenge in neurocritical care and neurorehabilitation. Although standardized behavioral assessments continue to serve as the clinical foundation for diagnosis, their reliance on overt behavioral responses may underestimate residual consciousness in a subset of patients. Recent advances in multimodal neuroimaging and neurophysiological techniques have substantially expanded the capacity to detect covert consciousness, reducing some of the inherent limitations of behavioral assessment and facilitating the identification of patients with preserved cognitive processing despite an absence of observable responses. However, these technological advances have not eliminated uncertainty in DoC assessment. Instead, uncertainty may be reconfigured as assessment progresses from behavioral observation to neural measurement, the inference of conscious awareness, prognostic evaluation, and clinical decision-making. Whether neural activity can reliably reflect subjective conscious experience, how neurophysiological evidence should inform prognostic evaluation and therapeutic decisions, and the emerging risks introduced by artificial intelligence-assisted assessment all indicate that uncertainty in DoC has evolved beyond a purely technical challenge into a broader problem of interpretation and clinical decision-making. Artificial intelligence (AI) further intersects with these uncertainties across multiple stages by contributing to signal processing, multimodal integration, consciousness inference, prognostic prediction, and clinical decision support. In this review, we propose the conceptual framework of "uncertainty migration" to characterize how uncertainty may change in form, persist across epistemic transitions, be redistributed between stages or actors, and accumulate through interactions between residual and newly introduced uncertainties across five interconnected domains of DoC assessment: behavioral assessment, neural measurement, consciousness inference, prognostic evaluation and clinical decision-making. These processes of transformation, propagation, redistribution, and accumulation are neither mutually exclusive nor necessarily linear, as discordant multimodal findings and longitudinal changes may prompt the reassessment of earlier evidence. We argue that multimodal approaches fundamentally change how consciousness-related evidence is acquired, and may reduce particular sources of uncertainty without eliminating the inherently inferential nature of consciousness assessment. Consequently, future advances in the DoC field should extend beyond improving diagnostic accuracy toward developing comprehensive strategies for uncertainty management that emphasize rigorous interpretation of evidence, longitudinal reassessment, multimodal evidence integration, transparent AI governance,and shared decision-making. Such an approach may better support cautious, transparent, and patient-centered clinical decisions in the face of persistent uncertainty.

Indexed as

Clinical Decision-MakingConsciousness DisordersArtificial IntelligenceConsciousnessDecision MakingHumansNeuroimagingUncertaintyclinical decision-makingconsciousness assessmentdisorders of consciousnessmultimodal neurotechnologyuncertainty

Identifiers

PMID42780860
PMCPMC13598963

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.