ArticleBMJ open2025
Blink reflex as a prognostic indicator for patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness: a prospective case-control study.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to investigate the characteristics of the blink reflex and its prognostic value for consciousness improvement in patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness (DOC).
designProspective case-control study.
settingThis study was conducted in a local hospital between March 2022 and March 2023.
participantsPatients in a vegetative state/unresponsive wakefulness syndrome or in a minimally conscious state were enrolled within 3 months from their brain injury. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The early component (R1), ipsilateral late component (iR2) and contralateral late component (cR2) responses at baseline were recorded using electromyography. The patients' clinical diagnosis and the best Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R) total score were assessed based on Chinese CRS-R evaluations. OUTCOME DEFINITION: At the 6-month follow-up, patients were categorised as improved or non-improved based on CRS-R score changes (improved (transition to a higher consciousness state); non-improved (worsened condition, static or death)).
resultsA total of 58 DOC patients were included in this study. Of the 58 DOC patients, 32 were classified as the improved group and 26 as the non-improved group. In the improved group, R2 responses were elicited in 30 patients, while only 16 patients in the non-improved group had elicited R2 responses. The non-improved group exhibited significantly lower R2 mean amplitudes (iR2 (105.08 µV vs 173.25 µV, p=0.01); cR2 (55.15 µV vs 114.03 µV, p=0.01)) and longer mean latencies (iR2 (41.08±6.72 ms vs 37.77±3.94 ms, p=0.03); cR2 (41.32±6.28 ms vs 37.48±4.07 ms, p=0.01)) compared with the improved group. The result demonstrated that the iR2 mean amplitude (OR=1.01, area under the curve (AUC)=0.78 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.93), sensitivity=78.12%, specificity=83.33%, p=0.02) and cR2 mean amplitude (OR=1.02, AUC=0.76 (95% CI 0.62 to 0.90), sensitivity=81.25%, specificity=72.22%, p=0.02) were significant predictors of consciousness improvement. Meanwhile, Pearson correlation analysis revealed that iR2 mean amplitude (r=0.42, p=0.003) and cR2 mean amplitude (r=0.53, p=0.001) significantly correlated with CRS-R score at baseline.
conclusionThe R2 amplitude in patients with prolonged DOC may serve as a prognostic indicator for consciousness improvement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.