Table 1.
Demographic and assessment details of patients from whom EEG data was analysed.
| Patient | Post-ictal interval (months) | Gender | Age at assessment (years) | Aetiology | Diagnosis | CRS-R | Exogenous attention (EEG) | Endogenous attention (EEG) | Command following (fMRI) | Command following (CRS-R) | Cortical atrophy score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| P1 | 4 | M | 23 | TBI | VS | 7 | Yes | Yes | Yes (SMA) | No | 1.0 |
| P2 | 28 | M | 31 | TBI | VS | 7 | No | No | No | No | 4.0 |
| P3 | 22 | M | 24 | TBI | VS | 8 | No | No | No | No | 4.0 |
| P4 | 15 | M | 38 | TBI | VS | 8 | No | No | Yes (SMA) | No | 3.5 |
| P5 | 18 | M | 20 | TBI | VS | 7 | No | No | Yes (SMA) | No | 4.0 |
| P6 | 14 | F | 25 | TBI | VS | 7 | No | No | Yes (PMC) | No | 1.0 |
| P7 | 8 | M | 36 | TBI | VS | 7 | No | No | No | No | 2.0 |
| P8 | 11 | M | 23 | Anoxia | VS | 7 | No | No | No | No | 3.5 |
| P9 | 14 | M | 40 | Anoxia | VS | 7 | No | No | No | No | 4.0 |
| P10 | 68 | M | 29 | TBI | MCS | 10 | Yes | No | No | Yes | 3.0 |
| P11 | 6 | F | 29 | Anoxia | MCS | 9 | Yes | No | Yes (IPS) | No | 1.5 |
| P12 | 11 | F | 20 | TBI | MCS | 11 | No | No | Artefact | No | 4.0 |
| P13 | 6 | F | 36 | Anoxia | MCS | 8 | No | No | No | No | 4.0 |
| P14 | 35 | M | 52 | TBI | MCS | 13 | No | No | Yes (SMA) | Yes | 2.0 |
| P15 | 4 | M | 19 | TBI | MCS | 12 | No | No | No | No | 2.5 |
| P16 | 86 | M | 37 | TBI | MCS | 12 | No | No | No | No | 3.0 |
| P17 | 13 | M | 45 | TBI | MCS | 14 | No | No | Yes (SMA) | Yes | 1.0 |
| P18 | 24 | F | 60 | TBI | MCS | 16 | No | No | No | Yes | 1.5 |
| P19 | 4 | M | 24 | TBI | MCS | 13 | No | No | Yes (SMA) | Yes | 2.0 |
| P20 | 10 | M | 41 | TBI | MCS | 19 | Yes | No | Yes (SMA) | Yes | 2.0 |
| P21 | 7 | M | 38 | TBI | MCS | 14 | No | No | No | Yes | 2.0 |