000916035 001__ 916035
000916035 005__ 20231027114349.0
000916035 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.1093/brain/awac335
000916035 0247_ $$2ISSN$$a0006-8950
000916035 0247_ $$2ISSN$$a1460-2156
000916035 0247_ $$2Handle$$a2128/33660
000916035 0247_ $$2pmid$$a36097353
000916035 0247_ $$2WOS$$aWOS:000892013000001
000916035 037__ $$aFZJ-2022-05881
000916035 082__ $$a610
000916035 1001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aAmiri, Moshgan$$b0
000916035 245__ $$aMultimodal prediction of residual consciousness in the intensive care unit: the CONNECT-ME study
000916035 260__ $$aOxford$$bOxford Univ. Press$$c2023
000916035 3367_ $$2DRIVER$$aarticle
000916035 3367_ $$2DataCite$$aOutput Types/Journal article
000916035 3367_ $$0PUB:(DE-HGF)16$$2PUB:(DE-HGF)$$aJournal Article$$bjournal$$mjournal$$s1673957512_27886
000916035 3367_ $$2BibTeX$$aARTICLE
000916035 3367_ $$2ORCID$$aJOURNAL_ARTICLE
000916035 3367_ $$00$$2EndNote$$aJournal Article
000916035 520__ $$aFunctional MRI (fMRI) and EEG may reveal residual consciousness in patients with disorders of consciousness (DoC), as reflected by a rapidly expanding literature on chronic DoC. However, acute DoC is rarely investigated, although identifying residual consciousness is key to clinical decision-making in the intensive care unit (ICU). Therefore, the objective of the prospective, observational, tertiary centre cohort, diagnostic phase IIb study ‘Consciousness in neurocritical care cohort study using EEG and fMRI’ (CONNECT-ME, NCT02644265) was to assess the accuracy of fMRI and EEG to identify residual consciousness in acute DoC in the ICU. Between April 2016 and November 2020, 87 acute DoC patients with traumatic or non-traumatic brain injury were examined with repeated clinical assessments, fMRI and EEG. Resting-state EEG and EEG with external stimulations were evaluated by visual analysis, spectral band analysis and a Support Vector Machine (SVM) consciousness classifier. In addition, within- and between-network resting-state connectivity for canonical resting-state fMRI networks was assessed. Next, we used EEG and fMRI data at study enrolment in two different machine-learning algorithms (Random Forest and SVM with a linear kernel) to distinguish patients in a minimally conscious state or better (≥MCS) from those in coma or unresponsive wakefulness state (≤UWS) at time of study enrolment and at ICU discharge (or before death). Prediction performances were assessed with area under the curve (AUC). Of 87 DoC patients (mean age, 50.0 ± 18 years, 43% female), 51 (59%) were ≤UWS and 36 (41%) were ≥ MCS at study enrolment. Thirty-one (36%) patients died in the ICU, including 28 who had life-sustaining therapy withdrawn. EEG and fMRI predicted consciousness levels at study enrolment and ICU discharge, with maximum AUCs of 0.79 (95% CI 0.77–0.80) and 0.71 (95% CI 0.77–0.80), respectively. Models based on combined EEG and fMRI features predicted consciousness levels at study enrolment and ICU discharge with maximum AUCs of 0.78 (95% CI 0.71–0.86) and 0.83 (95% CI 0.75–0.89), respectively, with improved positive predictive value and sensitivity. Overall, both machine-learning algorithms (SVM and Random Forest) performed equally well. In conclusion, we suggest that acute DoC prediction models in the ICU be based on a combination of fMRI and EEG features, regardless of the machine-learning algorithm used.
000916035 536__ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF4-5251$$a5251 - Multilevel Brain Organization and Variability (POF4-525)$$cPOF4-525$$fPOF IV$$x0
000916035 588__ $$aDataset connected to CrossRef, Journals: juser.fz-juelich.de
000916035 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aFisher, Patrick M$$b1
000916035 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)185083$$aRaimondo, Federico$$b2
000916035 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aSidaros, Annette$$b3
000916035 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aHribljan, Melita Cacic$$b4
000916035 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aOthman, Marwan H$$b5
000916035 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aZibrandtsen, Ivan$$b6
000916035 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aAlbrechtsen, Simon S$$b7
000916035 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aBergdal, Ove$$b8
000916035 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aHansen, Adam Espe$$b9
000916035 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aHassager, Christian$$b10
000916035 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aHøjgaard, Joan Lilja S$$b11
000916035 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aJakobsen, Elisabeth Waldemar$$b12
000916035 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aJensen, Helene Ravnholt$$b13
000916035 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aMøller, Jacob$$b14
000916035 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aNersesjan, Vardan$$b15
000916035 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aNikolic, Miki$$b16
000916035 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aOlsen, Markus Harboe$$b17
000916035 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aSigurdsson, Sigurdur Thor$$b18
000916035 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aSitt, Jacobo D$$b19
000916035 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aSølling, Christine$$b20
000916035 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aWelling, Karen Lise$$b21
000916035 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aWillumsen, Lisette M$$b22
000916035 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aHauerberg, John$$b23
000916035 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aLarsen, Vibeke Andrée$$b24
000916035 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aFabricius, Martin$$b25
000916035 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aKnudsen, Gitte Moos$$b26
000916035 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aKjaergaard, Jesper$$b27
000916035 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aMøller, Kirsten$$b28
000916035 7001_ $$0P:(DE-HGF)0$$aKondziella, Daniel$$b29$$eCorresponding author
000916035 773__ $$0PERI:(DE-600)1474117-9$$a10.1093/brain/awac335$$gp. awac335$$n1$$p50-64$$tBrain$$v146$$x0006-8950$$y2023
000916035 8564_ $$uhttps://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/916035/files/awac335.pdf$$yOpenAccess
000916035 909CO $$ooai:juser.fz-juelich.de:916035$$pdnbdelivery$$pdriver$$pVDB$$popen_access$$popenaire
000916035 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)185083$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b2$$kFZJ
000916035 9101_ $$0I:(DE-HGF)0$$6P:(DE-Juel1)185083$$a HHU Düsseldorf$$b2
000916035 9101_ $$0I:(DE-HGF)0$$6P:(DE-HGF)0$$a Department of Neurology, Copenhagen University Hospital , Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen , Denmark$$b29
000916035 9131_ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF4-525$$1G:(DE-HGF)POF4-520$$2G:(DE-HGF)POF4-500$$3G:(DE-HGF)POF4$$4G:(DE-HGF)POF$$9G:(DE-HGF)POF4-5251$$aDE-HGF$$bKey Technologies$$lNatural, Artificial and Cognitive Information Processing$$vDecoding Brain Organization and Dysfunction$$x0
000916035 9141_ $$y2023
000916035 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0160$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bEssential Science Indicators$$d2022-11-09
000916035 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)1190$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bBiological Abstracts$$d2022-11-09
000916035 915__ $$0LIC:(DE-HGF)CCBYNC4$$2HGFVOC$$aCreative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial CC BY-NC 4.0
000916035 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0113$$2StatID$$aWoS$$bScience Citation Index Expanded$$d2022-11-09
000916035 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0510$$2StatID$$aOpenAccess
000916035 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0420$$2StatID$$aNationallizenz$$d2023-10-21$$wger
000916035 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0200$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bSCOPUS$$d2023-10-21
000916035 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0300$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bMedline$$d2023-10-21
000916035 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0320$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bPubMed Central$$d2023-10-21
000916035 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0199$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bClarivate Analytics Master Journal List$$d2023-10-21
000916035 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)1050$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bBIOSIS Previews$$d2023-10-21
000916035 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0150$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bWeb of Science Core Collection$$d2023-10-21
000916035 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)1030$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bCurrent Contents - Life Sciences$$d2023-10-21
000916035 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)1110$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bCurrent Contents - Clinical Medicine$$d2023-10-21
000916035 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0100$$2StatID$$aJCR$$bBRAIN : 2022$$d2023-10-21
000916035 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0600$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bEbsco Academic Search$$d2023-10-21
000916035 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0030$$2StatID$$aPeer Review$$bASC$$d2023-10-21
000916035 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)9910$$2StatID$$aIF >= 10$$bBRAIN : 2022$$d2023-10-21
000916035 920__ $$lyes
000916035 9201_ $$0I:(DE-Juel1)INM-7-20090406$$kINM-7$$lGehirn & Verhalten$$x0
000916035 980__ $$ajournal
000916035 980__ $$aVDB
000916035 980__ $$aUNRESTRICTED
000916035 980__ $$aI:(DE-Juel1)INM-7-20090406
000916035 9801_ $$aFullTexts