ArticleCNS neuroscience & therapeutics2026
Respiratory Variability in Disorders of Consciousness: Relationship and Clinical Applications.
Article in CNS neuroscience & therapeutics, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRespiratory variability (RV) reflects the dynamic modulation of breathing patterns by the central nervous system and may serve as a physiological marker of consciousness. However, its predictive value in disorders of consciousness (DOC) remains unclear.
objectiveTo investigate the relationship between RV and the level of consciousness, and to evaluate the potential of RV-based analysis for predicting clinical outcomes in DOC patients.
methodsPatients with disorders of consciousness and healthy controls were assessed using inertial measurement unit (IMU) sensors to record triaxial acceleration signals. RV indicators were extracted from respiratory waveforms. A generalized additive model (GAM) was applied to adjust for confounding variables. Group differences were evaluated using Bootstrap resampling and the Mann-Whitney U test. Machine learning models-including random forest, elastic net, support vector machine, and partial least squares regression-were employed to predict Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R) scores and clinical outcomes.
resultsSignificant differences in multiple RV indicators were observed between patient and control groups (p < 0.05), indicating an association between RV and the pathophysiology of consciousness disorders. Among the tested models, the random forest algorithm achieved the best predictive performance for CRS-R scores (mean squared error = 3.76, R
conclusionsRespiratory variability, particularly when analyzed via random forest modeling, shows strong potential for prognostic assessment and clinical decision support in disorders of consciousness. RV may represent a non-invasive biomarker reflecting the neural control of respiration and consciousness state.
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.