4.3 Article

Consciousness Indexing and Outcome Prediction with Resting-State EEG in Severe Disorders of Consciousness

期刊

BRAIN TOPOGRAPHY
卷 31, 期 5, 页码 848-862

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10548-018-0643-x

关键词

Quantitative EEG; Unresponsive wakefulness syndrome; Minimally conscious state; Outcome prediction; Microstate analysis; Sequential floating forward selection

资金

  1. Hannelore-Kohl-Stiftung [2011013]
  2. Deutsche Stiftung Neurologie

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We applied the following methods to resting-state EEG data from patients with disorders of consciousness (DOC) for consciousness indexing and outcome prediction: microstates, entropy (i.e. approximate, permutation), power in alpha and delta frequency bands, and connectivity (i.e. weighted symbolic mutual information, symbolic transfer entropy, complex network analysis). Patients with unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (UWS) and patients in a minimally conscious state (MCS) were classified into these two categories by fitting and testing a generalised linear model. We aimed subsequently to develop an automated system for outcome prediction in severe DOC by selecting an optimal subset of features using sequential floating forward selection (SFFS). The two outcome categories were defined as UWS or dead, and MCS or emerged from MCS. Percentage of time spent in microstate D in the alpha frequency band performed best at distinguishing MCS from UWS patients. The average clustering coefficient obtained from thresholding beta coherence performed best at predicting outcome. The optimal subset of features selected with SFFS consisted of the frequency of microstate A in the 2-20 Hz frequency band, path length obtained from thresholding alpha coherence, and average path length obtained from thresholding alpha coherence. Combining these features seemed to afford high prediction power. Python and MATLAB toolboxes for the above calculations are freely available under the GNU public license for non-commercial use (https://qeeg.wordpress.com).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据