2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2015.07.020
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Information processing in patients in vegetative and minimally conscious states

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
30
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(31 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
(51 reference statements)
1
30
0
Order By: Relevance
“…ERP paradigms need to be further refined and tested in a larger sample of this patient group and also with genuine DOC patients before conclusions about their applicability for diagnosis can be drawn. Alterations have been suggested in the topography, latency and amplitude of ERPs in VS/UWS and MCS patients (Kotchoubey et al, 2005; Real et al, 2016). Our findings, although limited in their generalizability by the small sample size, allows us to suggest the possibility that, in conscious patients with localized damage, these potentials may be completely absent due to multiple factors.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…ERP paradigms need to be further refined and tested in a larger sample of this patient group and also with genuine DOC patients before conclusions about their applicability for diagnosis can be drawn. Alterations have been suggested in the topography, latency and amplitude of ERPs in VS/UWS and MCS patients (Kotchoubey et al, 2005; Real et al, 2016). Our findings, although limited in their generalizability by the small sample size, allows us to suggest the possibility that, in conscious patients with localized damage, these potentials may be completely absent due to multiple factors.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nevertheless, the use of the P300 to distinguish between VS/UWS and MCS has shown contradictory results: some studies have found some differences in this ERP between both groups (Schnakers et al, 2008b; Cavinato et al, 2011; Risetti et al, 2013), while others did not (Kotchoubey et al, 2005; Perrin et al, 2006; Fischer et al, 2010; Real et al, 2016). Covert response to commands in VS/UWS patients has been reported with this ERP component (Chennu et al, 2013).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In active conditions, the patient was told either to keep a mental count of their own name presented (Hauger et al, ; Risetti et al, ; Schnakers et al, ) or to attentively listen “because there might be a change in voice speech” (Hauger et al, ; Schnakers et al, ). A more recent study merely used a two‐tone oddball paradigm with the instruction to count deviant tones in the active phase (Real et al, ). These studies succeeded in identifying some patients with positive results (i.e., larger P300s in active condition than in passive listening), and the respondents were more often in a minimally conscious state than in a vegetative state.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These studies succeeded in identifying some patients with positive results (i.e., larger P300s in active condition than in passive listening), and the respondents were more often in a minimally conscious state than in a vegetative state. A major concern is that, when applied to healthy cooperative subjects, most tested active ERP paradigms did not show statistically significant results in all individuals (Hauger et al, ; Real et al, ; Schnakers et al, ). More generally, the past literature about attention effects on P300 in healthy subjects reported group effects, with no guarantee of significant effects in every individual subject.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%