. 2021 Jun 16;41(24):5251–5262. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1740-20.2021

Table 2.

Summary of main results

		Threefold cross-validation accuracy, training sample	Monte-Carlo comparison between HER and random EEG segments	Accuracy in validation sample (test against chance)	Comparison between HER and random EEG segments
PET-based consciousness diagnosis	HER 200–400 ms	81.62%	p_mc < 0.001	86.67% (p_bin < 0.001, p_mc = 0.001)	p_mc = 0.064
PET-based consciousness diagnosis	Random EEG segments (mean ± SD across 1000 permutations)	79.08 ± 0.7%	p_mc < 0.001	80.84 ± 4.09% (p_bin < 0.001)	p_mc = 0.064
CRS-R-based consciousness diagnosis	HER 156-356 ms	79.06%	p_mc = 0.038	76.67% (p_bin < 0.001, p_mc = 0.004)	p_mc = 0.041
CRS-R-based consciousness diagnosis	Random EEG segments (mean ± SD across 1000 permutations)	72.95 ± 4.49%	p_mc = 0.038	66.42 ± 7.13% (p_bin = 0.272)	p_mc = 0.041

Classifications based on HERs consistently outperform classifications based on random EEG segments. Classifications using PET-based diagnosis consistently outperform classifications using CRS-R-based diagnosis.