Next Article in Journal
Field-Programmable Gate Array (FPGA)-Based Lock-In Amplifier System with Signal Enhancement: A Comprehensive Review on the Design for Advanced Measurement Applications
Previous Article in Journal
The Fluorescent Detection of Alkaline Phosphatase Based on Iron Nanoclusters and a Manganese Dioxide Nanosheet
Previous Article in Special Issue
Nighttime Cough Characteristics in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Patients
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Characterization of RAP Signal Patterns, Temporal Relationships, and Artifact Profiles Derived from Intracranial Pressure Sensors in Acute Traumatic Neural Injury

1
Department of Biomedical Engineering, Price Faculty of Engineering, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB R3T 2N2, Canada
2
Undergraduate Medicine, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB R3T 2N2, Canada
3
Section of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB R3T 2N2, Canada
4
Department of Human Anatomy and Cell Science, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB R3T 2N2, Canada
5
Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Karolinksa Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, Sweden
6
Pan Am Clinic Foundation, Winnipeg, MB R3M 3E4, Canada
7
Division of Anaesthesia, Department of Medicine, Addenbrooke’s Hospital, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 1TN, UK
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sensors 2025, 25(2), 586; https://doi.org/10.3390/s25020586
Submission received: 18 December 2024 / Revised: 14 January 2025 / Accepted: 15 January 2025 / Published: 20 January 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sensing Signals for Biomedical Monitoring)

Abstract

:
Goal: Current methodologies for assessing cerebral compliance using pressure sensor technologies are prone to errors and issues with inter- and intra-observer consistency. RAP, a metric for measuring intracranial compensatory reserve (and therefore compliance), holds promise. It is derived using the moving correlation between intracranial pressure (ICP) and the pulse amplitude of ICP (AMP). RAP remains largely unexplored in cases of moderate to severe acute traumatic neural injury (also known as traumatic brain injury (TBI)). The goal of this work is to explore the general description of (a) RAP signal patterns and behaviors derived from ICP pressure transducers, (b) temporal statistical relationships, and (c) the characterization of the artifact profile. Methods: Different summary and statistical measurements were used to describe RAP’s pattern and behaviors, along with performing sub-group analyses. The autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) model was employed to outline the time-series structure of RAP across different temporal resolutions using the autoregressive (p-order) and moving average orders (q-order). After leveraging the time-series structure of RAP, similar methods were applied to ICP and AMP for comparison with RAP. Finally, key features were identified to distinguish artifacts in RAP. This might involve leveraging ICP/AMP signals and statistical structures. Results: The mean and time spent within the RAP threshold ranges ([0.4, 1], (0, 0.4), and [−1, 0]) indicate that RAP exhibited high positive values, suggesting an impaired compensatory reserve in TBI patients. The median optimal ARIMA model for each resolution and each signal was determined. Autocorrelative function (ACF) and partial ACF (PACF) plots of residuals verified the adequacy of these median optimal ARIMA models. The median of residuals indicates that ARIMA performed better with the higher-resolution data. To identify artifacts, (a) ICP q-order, AMP p-order, and RAP p-order and q-order, (b) residuals of ICP, AMP, and RAP, and (c) cross-correlation between residuals of RAP and AMP proved to be useful at the minute-by-minute resolution, whereas, for the 10-min-by-10-min data resolution, only the q-order of the optimal ARIMA model of ICP and AMP served as a distinguishing factor. Conclusions: RAP signals derived from ICP pressure sensor technology displayed reproducible behaviors across this population of TBI patients. ARIMA modeling at the higher resolution provided comparatively strong accuracy, and key features were identified leveraging these models that could identify RAP artifacts. Further research is needed to enhance artifact management and broaden applicability across varied datasets.

1. Introduction

Acute biomechanical traumatic neural injury, also termed traumatic brain injury (TBI), is a significant global health concern, causing over 50 million cases annually and incurring worldwide costs of approximately CAD 540 billion [1]. In Canada and globally, TBI remains a leading cause of death and disability [2]. The impact of moderate to severe TBI involves both primary and secondary injuries. Primary injuries occur at the moment of impact, causing immediate structural brain damage. In contrast, secondary injuries develop over time through systemic and cellular processes that exacerbate brain tissue damage. Unlike primary injuries, secondary injury mechanisms may respond to therapeutic interventions, offering opportunities to enhance patient outcomes. To prevent secondary injury across patient populations, current management strategies for moderate to severe TBI focus on guideline-based interventions that target physiological parameters using data from invasive pressure sensor technologies [2,3,4,5]. A key focus is maintaining intracranial pressure (ICP) below 22 mmHg, triggering therapeutic measures when exceeded [2,3]. ICP, which is often derived from invasive strain-gauge pressure sensors, is also used as an indicator of intracranial compliance, with the bedside manual visual inspection of pulse waveform morphology for assessing compensatory reserve. Intracranial compliance/compensatory reserve is a parameter that provides insight into the brain’s ability to adapt to changes in volume while maintaining stable pressure levels [6,7]. However, these methods are prone to errors, along with inter-observer and intra-observer consistency issues.
As a result, the RAP index was derived using signal sources from ICP pressure sensors, and has the potential for usage in TBI. RAP is a metric of intracranial compensatory reserve (and therefore compliance) derived using the moving correlation between ICP and the pulse amplitude of ICP (AMP) from any ICP pressure sensor technology [8,9,10,11,12]. In recent hydrocephalus studies, RAP (the correlation [R] between AMP [A] and ICP [P]) helped predict shunt failure in patients [8,9,10,11]. In addition, this index can be continuously calculated at the bedside in those patients with continuous ICP monitoring, optimally positioning it for use in TBI monitoring. As RAP values are the Pearson correlation coefficients, they range from −1 to +1, with lower positive values indicating good compliance, while higher positive and negative values suggest poor and exhausted compliance, respectively [8,9]. However, RAP has not been thoroughly investigated in moderate to severe TBI populations. Specifically, there is a lack of understanding of the general statistical behaviors of RAP in relation to ICP and AMP, its temporal time-series structure, and the characterization of its artifact profiles [7,13].
Therefore, this study aims to explore the following: (A) the general description of RAP signal patterns and behaviors, (B) the temporal statistical profile of RAP, and (C) the characterization of RAP artifact profiles. Gaining more profound insights into these aspects is essential for advancing the future integration of the RAP index into bedside monitoring, enhancing patient trajectory modeling, and supporting clinical intervention studies based on RAP values.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Patients

As with previous studies from our lab group [14,15], the data were retrospectively obtained from the TBI database prospectively maintained at the Multi-omic Analytics and Integrative Neuroinformatics in the HUman Brain (MAIN-HUB) Lab at the University of Manitoba. This study included patient data collected from January 2018 to March 2023. All patients in this cohort experienced moderate to severe TBI (Glasgow Coma Score < 12). Invasive ICP and arterial blood pressure (ABP) monitoring were conducted as per Brain Trauma Foundation (BTF) guidelines [2].

2.2. Ethics

Data collection was conducted with full approval from the University of Manitoba Health Research Ethics Board (H2017:181, H2017:188, and H2024:266).

2.3. Data Collection

In line with our previous work [14,15], all physiological data were recorded and digitized at a high frequency of 100 Hz or higher using Intensive Care Monitoring ‘Plus’ (ICM+ v8.5.4.6) data acquisition software, with analog-to-digital converters (Data Translations, DT9804 or DT9826) employed as needed. ABP was captured via radial arterial lines, while ICP was measured invasively using intra-parenchymal strain gauge probes (Codman ICP MicroSensor; Codman & Shurtleff Inc., Raynham, MA, USA) placed in the frontal lobe or using external ventricular drains (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA) in four cases.
For this study, demographic information at admission was extracted according to existing prognostic models in TBI. The collected demographic data included age, biological sex, admission pupillary response (bilaterally reactive, unilaterally reactive, or bilaterally unreactive), Marshall computed tomography (CT) grade, and Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOSE) grade.

2.4. Signal Processing

Post-acquisition processing of the above signals was conducted using ICM+, in keeping with our previously published methodology. ICP and ABP were initially decimated using 10 s moving averages updated every 10 s to avoid data overlap [14,15,16]. Mean arterial pressure (MAP) was subsequently calculated from ABP. AMP was obtained through Fourier analysis of the fundamental harmonic of the ICP waveform [7,17,18]. RAP was derived via the moving Pearson correlation coefficient between 30 consecutive 10 s mean windows (i.e., each calculation window was 5 min) of the parent signals (ICP and AMP), updated every minute according to previously validated methods [9,19,20,21]. This analysis also included cerebrovascular reactivity. The pressure reactivity index (PRx) is a continuous measure for assessing cerebrovascular reactivity [6,22,23]. Likewise, PRx was determined using the Pearson correlation coefficient between ICP and MAP, where the update period (i.e., one minute) and the calculation window size (i.e., 5 min) were similar to those of RAP [14,24,25].

2.5. Analysis of the Patterns and Behaviours of RAP

Alongside RAP, the analysis also included ICP, MAP, AMP, and CPP signals, since ICP and AMP were used to derive RAP [8,19], while MAP and cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) helped establish standard thresholds used in RAP analysis in this field [2,26]. Firstly, Panda’s (a Python library) [27] describe function [28] from Python was used to find the summary measurements for each signal in all patients. Following this, a custom script was executed to find the time spent on RAP within certain threshold ranges (0.4 to 1, 0 to 0.4, and −1 to 0), based on a systematic review study previously conducted by our lab [19]. Afterwards, a comparative sub-group analysis was conducted based on age, biological sex, pupillary response, Marshall CT grade, outcome (GOSE grade), ICP, AMP, and PRx values. Threshold lines for these comparisons were established using commonly referenced values from prior studies [29,30,31,32] in related fields, as follows:
  • Age—less than 40 years, 40 to 60 years, and above 60 years;
  • Pupillary response—bilateral reactive, bilateral unreactive, and unilateral unreactive;
  • Marshall CT grade—grade II, grade III, grade IV, and grade V;
  • Outcome GOSE grade—alive/dead (2 or higher vs. 1) and favorable/unfavorable (5 or higher vs. 4 or less);
  • ICP thresholds—below 20 mmHg and above 22 mmHg;
  • AMP thresholds—below 1, between 1 and 3, and above 3;
  • PRx thresholds—less than 0 vs. greater than 0 and less than 0.25 vs. greater than 0.25
Mann–Whitney U-test was utilized for the formal comparison since none of the groups showed normal distributions. One-way ANOVA was used to compare more than two groups. To run these operations, Python’s (version 3.7.16) mannwhitneyu [33] and f_oneway [34] functions from scipy.stats library were used, respectively.

2.6. Analysis of RAP Time-Series Structures

2.6.1. Application of ARIMA Model

The autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) model is a widely used statistical method for time-series forecasting [35,36,37,38]. It works by combining three main components, as follows: autoregression (AR), differencing to make data stationary (I for Integrated), and a moving average (MA). The model aims to capture the underlying patterns in time-series data and predict future values based on historical observations [35,36,37,38]. The AR part is controlled by the parameter p, representing the number of lagged observations in the model. It refers to the regression of the variable on its own lagged (previous) values. The parameter d represents the number of times the data need to be differenced to achieve stationarity. The MA part is controlled by parameter q, representing the number of lagged error terms in the model. It refers to modeling the error (or residual) term as a linear combination of previous error terms [35,36,37,38]. An ARIMA model is usually written as ARIMA(p, d, q). Assuming the signal is stationary (d-order = 0), a general autoregressive moving average model for a physiological signal, X, can be represented using Equation (1). In this model, p is the autoregressive order, q is the moving average order, Xt is the signal at time t, Xti is the signal at time ti, εt is the error at time t, εtj is the error at time tj, φ is the autoregressive coefficient at time ti, and θ is the moving average coefficient at time tj [14].
X t = c + ε t + i = 1 p φ i X t i + j = 1 q θ j ε t j
This ARIMA model was employed to capture the structure of time-series signals. ARIMA was chosen since it provides interpretability in terms of temporal dependencies (p, d, q), making it particularly suited for understanding signal dynamics, comparing temporal structure among signals and identifying artifacts. It is also a similar methodology to those used for determining the more basic aspects of cerebral blood flow physiologies [14,15]. According to previous works from the lab, both the p-order and q-order for determining the optimal ARIMA model varied from 0 to 10 [14,15]. The analysis was run on the differenced data (discussed in Section 2.6.3), and therefore, the d-order was set to 0, which effectively acted as d-order = 1. The ARIMA function from the statsmodels module [39] of Python was used for this analysis. Each combination of the orders was evaluated to find the optimal model for each signal and each patient.

2.6.2. Statistical Metrics for ARIMA Analysis

Akaike Information Criterion (AIC), Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC), and Log-Likelihood (LL) were calculated to assess whether the models effectively captured the structure of the signal. These are statistical metrics used to evaluate the quality and goodness-of-fit of an ARIMA model, helping to assess how well the model captures the underlying structure of the time-series data [14,40,41]. Each of these metrics has its own characteristics and significance in model selection. AIC measures the goodness-of-fit of a model while penalizing for model complexity (the number of parameters). It balances model fit and complexity to avoid overfitting. BIC is similar to AIC but applies a more substantial penalty for models with more parameters, making it more conservative in terms of model complexity. LL measures the likelihood that the model could have generated the observed data. It reflects the fit of the model without penalizing for complexity. Lower AIC and BIC values indicate a better model, while higher LL values indicate a better fit [14,40,41].
According to a previous study from our lab, BIC is more stringent than AIC and LL [14]. On the other hand, models based on LL were more complex and could potentially overfit the data, leading to better residuals [14]. Given this, AIC was considered the most balanced option for model selection, as it strikes a middle ground between the stringency of BIC and the leniency of LL. For this reason, AIC was chosen to find the optimal ARIMA models for the signals.

2.6.3. Stationarity Analysis

Since the ARIMA model is built on the assumption of the stationarity of time series, the data need to be stationary to apply an ARIMA model. Hence, stationarity analysis was carried out. Like in the previous work from our lab [16], Augmented Dickey–Fuller (ADF) and Kwiatkowski–Phillips–Schmidt–Shin (KPSS) tests were used to check the stationarity of all the signals. The ADF test indicates whether a time series is trend-stationary, while the KPSS test determines if the series remains stationary around a linear trend [36,42]. If the p-value from the ADF test is less and the p-value from the KPSS test is higher than a certain threshold, the time series is considered stationary. In line with previous studies [16], the threshold was set at 0.05 for both tests. The adfuller and kpss functions from the statsmodels module [39] in Python were used to perform the tests at the patient level. Additionally, due to the ADF and KPSS test results on the original data (discussed in Section 3.2.1), these tests were performed on each patient’s first-order-differenced data. It is noteworthy that the differenced data were achieved after temporal resolution.

2.6.4. Generation of Different Temporal Resolutions of Data

ICP, AMP, and RAP were calculated across various temporal resolutions for a comprehensive analysis and to examine the impact of the temporal resolution reduction on the results. Subsequently, the optimal ARIMA model at the patient level was calculated for each parameter for every temporal resolution. The temporal resolutions applied in this study included minute-by-minute, 10 min intervals, 30 min intervals, and hour-by-hour intervals. The primary derived data were at minute-by-minute intervals. Afterward, Panda’s resample function [43] was used to reduce the resolution. The primary data (i.e., minute-by-minute resolution) mean of 10 min data points was determined as a single non-overlapping point in 10 min intervals. Similarly, for the 30 min and 1 h intervals, the means of 30 consecutive data points and 60 consecutive data points, respectively, were used to represent each interval.

2.6.5. Evaluation Tools

After deriving the optimal ARIMA model for each patient, the median optimal ARIMA model for each signal was calculated based on those models (i.e., median p-order and median q-order values were calculated). The choice of the median value for optimal models across the whole population ensured a more representative summary across the examples while reducing the impact of outliers. To confirm the adequacy of the median optimal ARIMA models, the magnitude of residuals, autocorrelation function (ACF), and partial ACF (PACF) plots of residuals were examined by comparing the raw data to the modeled data [14,36]. Residuals represent the differences between actual data points and model-predicted values. The ACF measures the relationship between a time series and its past values, while the PACF indicates the correlation between a time series and its lagged values, excluding the effects of intermediate lags. For a well-fitted ARIMA model, residuals should be minimal, and the ACF and PACF plots should show no significant spikes at any lags, indicating that the model has captured the underlying structure [14,36]. Additionally, this analysis included the calculation of the overall variance in data, the residual variance, and the count of significant spikes to justify that the data had been modeled well.

2.7. RAP Artifact Segment Analysis

2.7.1. Separating True Artifact Segments

For this section, true artifacts had to be calculated. Previously, to obtain clean and artifact-free data, artifacts were manually detected and removed from the raw collected data by experts in cerebral physiologic signal analysis and neurophysiology. Therefore, while comparing clean data with non-clean data, any additional data present in the non-clean version but absent in the clean version should be taken as representing artifacts. This step was performed by comparing timestamps of clean and non-clean data. Afterwards, identified artifact segments were saved into different comma-separated value (CSV) files.

2.7.2. Analysis of Clean Data and Artifact Segments

The optimal models for the clean signal have already been obtained in the previous section. The optimal models for the artifact segments were calculated for each signal of each patient using the same methodology. Finally, a comparison between clean data and artifact segments based on temporal structure was conducted using various statistical techniques. The temporal resolutions applied in this analysis included minute-by-minute and 10 min intervals. The remaining resolutions were excluded from this analysis because, at such low resolutions, the quantity of artifact data would be insufficient to yield significant results in this section.
This analysis focused on three key areas:
(i)
Comparing optimal ARIMA models—The optimal models for the clean data were obtained in the previous section (i.e., Section 2.6). The optimal models for the artifact segments were also computed for each signal of each patient using the same methodology. These models for clean data and artifact segments are expected to differ, resulting in varying p-orders and q-orders between the two groups for each patient. A formal comparison of the groups’ ARIMA orders for each signal was conducted using the Mann–Whitney U test, with scatterplots provided for visual representation;
(ii)
Comparing the residuals—Using the median optimal ARIMA model calculated for clean data in Section 2.6, residuals for clean and artifact segments were computed and formally compared at the patient level. The results are expected to indicate significant differences in the mean residuals and variance of residuals between the clean and artifact groups;
(iii)
Comparing the cross-correlation of residuals—If cross-correlation is calculated between RAP residuals and ICP/AMP residuals, the expectation is that the maximum correlation value between clean RAP and clean ICP/AMP residuals would be higher than that between clean RAP and artifact ICP/AMP residuals. Since RAP is derived from ICP and AMP, their residuals should naturally show a strong correlation. However, this correlation is expected to decrease when considering the artifact segments of ICP/AMP, as these segments do not accurately represent true ICP/AMP values. The correlate function from the Numpy library was used to calculate the cross-correlations, and it measured the similarity between two signals (or datasets) as a function of the time lag applied to one of them (i.e., calculated dot product).

2.7.3. Evaluating Identified Features

After analyzing the data to identify features with the potential to effectively distinguish artifacts, a simple sliding window approach was applied to the non-clean data to assess the success rate of these features in identifying artifacts within the signal. The success rate of capturing artifacts within the signal was calculated as (captured artifacts/true artifacts) × 100%.

3. Results

3.1. Patient Demographics

As reported in Table 1, 109 TBI patients were included in this study, with a median recording duration of 4125.13 min. The median age of the patients was 43 years (interquartile range (IQR): 29 to 57), and 89 of the patients were male (81.65%). The median Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score was 7 (IQR: 4 to 8), while the median motor sub-score was 4 (IQR: 2 to 5).

3.2. General RAP Patterns and Behaviours

3.2.1. Summary Measurements

There were some unrealistic values of ICP and MAP in the data that could lead to erroneous CPP, AMP, and RAP values, since they are derived from them. Therefore, according to the previous studies [44], data points with ICP > 100 mmHg or <−15 mmHg and MAP > 200 mmHg or <0 mmHg were excluded from this analysis. Afterwards, summary measures of the aforementioned parameters were calculated and are depicted in Table A1 of Appendix A. Notably, RAP had a mean of 0.632 ± 0.483.
Based on our previous study, RAP was classified into three distinct states according to its value [19], which were as follows: (i) state 1, representing a healthy condition, was characterized by small positive RAP values close to zero; (ii) state 2, which was most commonly observed in TBI patients, reflected impaired intracranial compliance and compensatory reserve, with elevated RAP values (RAP > 0.4), and (iii) state 3 occurred in more severe conditions, indicating the further deterioration of compensatory reserve, cerebrovascular reactivity, and cerebral autoregulation. This state was associated with a significant number of fatal outcomes and was marked by declining RAP values, including, in some cases, negative RAP [19]. Based on the mean RAP obtained in this study, it can be stated that the mean RAP fell into state 2, indicating impaired cerebral compliance and compensatory reserve. This finding is consistent with our previous study, wherein state 2 was also the most commonly observed condition among TBI patients [19].

3.2.2. Time Spent Within Thresholds

According to the threshold ranges outlined in Section 2.5, the percentage of time spent within each range was calculated for all patients and is presented in Table A2 of Appendix A. So, using the RAP index, the highest percentage of time spent was in the impaired state (ranging from RAP of 0.4 to 1), which was 78.091% and corresponds to state 2, as previously defined [19].

3.2.3. Sub-Group Analysis

The sub-group analysis results are shown in Appendix A Table A3, Table A4, Table A5, Table A6, Table A7, Table A8, Table A9, Table A10, Table A11, Table A12, Table A13, Table A14 and Table A15. In the age groups analysis, for the first age comparison (i.e., age above and below 40 years), only ICP showed a significant difference (p = 0.048) between the two groups, with AMP having a near-significant p-value of 0.065227, as depicted in Table A3 of Appendix A. In the second age comparison (age below 40 years, 40 to 60 years, and above 60 years), AMP and RAP were significantly different (p = 0.046, p = 0.005), while ICP showed no significant difference (p = 0.284) (Table A4 of Appendix A).
In the M/F sex groups, only CPP (p = 0.008) was significantly different (Table A5 of Appendix A). For pupillary response, none of the parameters showed significant differences (Table A6 of Appendix A). In Marshall CT grade groupings, ICP, AMP, and RAP were significantly different across groups (p = 0.002, p = 0.0003, p = 0.00001) (Table A7 of Appendix A). RAP increased from grade II to IV, but at grade V, it decreased. A similar case was observed for ICP and AMP.
For outcome comparison, the GOSE grade was assessed at 1-month and 6-month intervals (Table A8, Table A9, Table A10 and Table A11 of Appendix A). In the alive/dead comparison, for both cases, AMP significantly differentiated the groups in both intervals (p = 0.003, p = 0.01), while ICP and CPP were only significant in the 1-month GOSE results (p = 0.033, p = 0.032). However, RAP was not significant in either case. In the favorable/unfavorable cases, ICP, CPP, and AMP were significantly different for both intervals, but RAP again showed no significant difference in either case (p = 0.294, p = 0.403).
In the subgroup analysis for ICP, all parameters showed significant differences between the two groups (p = close to 0 for both groups). The group with ICP > 22 mmHg had higher RAP and AMP values than the other group. Similarly, in the AMP analysis, both ICP and RAP increased as AMP rose, reflecting the findings from the ICP subgroup analysis, with all parameters displaying significant differences.
Finally, in PRx analysis, the first comparison showed that RAP had a lower mean value when PRx > 0 compared to PRx < 0, though ICP and AMP were higher. This finding suggests that impaired cerebrovascular reactivity (PRx > 0) was associated with reduced RAP, aligning with the results of our systematic review [19]. This decrease in RAP corresponded to state 3 of RAP [19], as defined in Section 3.2.1. Similarly, in the second comparison, using a PRx threshold of 0.25, a comparable pattern emerged, with lower RAP being associated with higher PRx values (i.e., PRx > 0.25). Similar to the ICP and AMP threshold analyses, all parameters demonstrated significant differences between sub-groups in the PRx threshold analysis (p = close to 0 for all cases). The results of these three threshold analyses are presented in Table A12, Table A13, Table A14 and Table A15 of Appendix A.

3.3. Optimal ARIMA Structure Analysis

3.3.1. Stationarity Assessment

As discussed in Section 2.6.3, ADF and KPSS tests were performed for each patient and signal to check the stationarity of the signals. Initially, these tests were applied to the original data. Table A16 and Table A17 of Appendix B illustrate the p-values for each patient’s test results at the minute-by-minute data resolution. Additionally, Table A20 and Table A21 of Appendix C show the summarized results. As shown in the tables, while most of the signals appeared stationary according to the ADF tests, the KPSS test indicated that most were non-stationary. This suggests that the signals are largely trend-stationary, but likely non-stationary around a linear trend. However, for ARIMA model analysis, the data need to be stationary in terms of both cases. Therefore, a first-order difference was applied to the original data after temporal resolution. Table A18 and Table A19 of Appendix B show the p-values for each patient’s test results at the minute-by-minute data resolution. The resulting outcomes are summarized in Table A22 and Table A23 of Appendix C.
As evident from the tables, after applying first-order differencing, nearly all the data, with a few exceptions, were assessed as stationary in both tests. Therefore, these differenced data were suitable for ARIMA model analysis.

3.3.2. Determination of Optimal ARIMA Models

Appendix D provides the optimal ARIMA models for each signal at each resolution for each patient, detailing the p-, d-, and q-orders along with their AIC values. Based on these results, the population global median optimal models in each resolution were calculated and are shown in Table 2. As shown in the table, the models for each signal were quite similar in the case of 10-min resolution and below.

3.3.3. Evaluation of Optimal ARIMA Models

With the median optimal ARIMA models now determined, the quality of these models can be assessed using the residuals, ACF, and PACF plots of residuals. Figure 1 represents a patient example of the ACF and PACF plots of residuals for RAP at 1 min intervals for pre- and post-ARIMA modeled data.
The figure corresponds to the residuals of the RAP signal (a) before and (b) after ARIMA. The original plots had significant spikes in both ACF and PACF plots, while the spikes in post-ARIMA (3, 1, 3) were mostly within the 95% confidence interval, indicating that the model moderately accounts for the RAP structure.
ACF, autocorrelative function; ARIMA, autoregressive integrated moving average; PACF, partial autocorrelative function; RAP, compensatory reserve index.
Figure 1a corresponds to the original RAP data since the orders were set to zero (ARIMA (0, 0, 0)). Figure 1b utilizes the median optimal ARIMA model for RAP (ARIMA (3, 1, 3)). It is evident that the ACF plot of the residuals using the original data showed a gradual decay, while the PACF plot had significant spikes at various lags, indicating that the ARIMA (0, 0, 0) model did not effectively capture the signal’s structure. On the contrary, after applying the median optimal ARIMA model for RAP (3, 1, 3), only two significant spikes were present at lag 15, with another after lag 30 in the PACF plot. Otherwise, most of the ACF and PACF values fell within the 95% confidence interval, implying that any autocorrelation left in the residuals is not statistically significant and suggesting that the calculated ARIMA model successfully captured the structure of the signal.
Figure A1 and Figure A3 of Appendix E illustrate a patient example of ACF and PACF plots with this comparison for ICP and AMP signals, and demonstrate similar results, proving that the calculated median optimal ARIMA model captures the time-series structure with moderate performance.
While visually, the performance of the optimal ARIMA model is satisfactory, the global population median of residuals was compared with it to provide a better description between the original data and those yielded after optimal ARIMA model application for all signals, as reported in Table 3.
While calculating, the absolute value of the residuals of each data point was taken for the betterment of the calculation. The median residual of the optimal ARIMA model was substantially less than that of the original data for all signals, which further emphasizes the ARIMA model’s success in capturing the signal structure. Additionally, the variance of the overall data, variance in the residuals, and the number of significant spikes were calculated and are shown in Table A25 of Appendix E. It can be seen that the variance of the residuals was smaller than that of the original data. Furthermore, both ACF and PACF plots for the modeled data had only one significant spike, in contrast to the original ACF and PACF plots, which had seven and two spikes, respectively. These values align with the results from Figure 1 and Table 3, further proving that the data are being modeled. The values of these parameters were calculated for each signal of each patient at the minute-by-minute resolution, as shown in Table A27, Table A28 and Table A29 of Appendix E. Subsequently, the means and medians were determined, as presented in Table A30 and Table A31 of Appendix E. The attribute values in these tables indicate that the data were adequately modeled. The values of the variance in the residuals and the number of significant spikes in ACF and PACF plots were much smaller than those of the original data.
A similar analysis was performed at different temporal resolutions for the same patients. Figure 2 shows a patient example of the ACF and PACF plots of the residuals for RAP at the remaining temporal resolutions. Even though all the lags were within the 95% confidence interval at all the resolutions (which was also justified by the result in Table A26 of Appendix E), the ACF and PACF plots exhibited comparatively significant spikes with higher magnitudes than those at the minute-by-minute temporal resolution (depicted in Figure 1b). This indicates that while the optimal ARIMA model captures the time-series structure in both cases, it is more successful at the minute-by-minute resolution than at other lower temporal resolutions. Figure A2 and Figure A4 of Appendix E present these comparative figures for ICP and AMP at the 10 min, 30 min and 1 h intervals, which also displayed similar characteristics in the ACF and PACF plots of the residuals.
The figure documents the ACF and PACF of the residuals of the RAP-mapped ARIMA structure in the (a) 10-min-by-10-min, (b) 30-min-by-30-min, and (c) hour-by-hour relationships.
ACF, autocorrelative function; ARIMA, autoregressive integrated moving average; PACF, partial autocorrelative function; RAP, compensatory reserve index.

3.4. Assessment of the Features for Identifying Artifacts

3.4.1. Comparing Optimal ARIMA Models

Initially, the optimal ARIMA models for the artifact segments of each signal of each patient were calculated. The results are depicted in Table A33 of Appendix F. Afterwards, the medians and means of the orders of the ARIMA models for the two groups were calculated. Table A34 and Table A35 of Appendix F contain the median and the mean results for the 1 min and 10 min temporal resolutions. d-order was not included in the analysis, as it was set to 1 across all cases. While calculating optimal models for the artifact segments of 10 min data, five examples (i.e., patients) could not provide any result because of the inadequacy of data (i.e., artifact segments). As both tables show, the median and mean orders of all clean and artifact data parameters differed significantly, particularly for the minute-by-minute data. The Mann–Whitney U test that was conducted on these two groups of orders could provide a clear statistical comparison. The resulting p-values are as follows.
As reported in Table 4, since p-value < 0.05 indicates a significant difference between the two groups, it can be concluded that in the case of minute-by-minute data, both the p-orders (p = close to 0) and q-orders (p = 0.01526) of the RAP ARIMA model can serve as effective indicators for distinguishing artifact segments from clean data. However, only the q-order of ICP (p = 0.00058) and the p-order of AMP (p = 0.00501) demonstrated a significant difference between the two groups. For the lower-resolution data, RAP did not appear to show any notable differences across any orders. However, the q-orders of ICP (p = close to 0) and AMP (p = 0.00032) exhibited significant differences.
To visually represent the data, scatterplots comparing the orders of the two groups are shown in Figure 3. As seen in the figure, there are only a few patient examples wherein the clean and artifact segment orders overlap in the minute-by-minute resolution (Figure 3a). The majority of them differ, confirming that the optimal models for the parameters of clean and artifact segments are quite distinct. In the case of the 10 min resolution data, although many instances show non-overlapping orders, there are more examples of overlap compared to the minute-by-minute resolution. Scatterplots for RAP q-order and the rest of the signals are demonstrated in Appendix F Figure A6, Figure A7 and Figure A8. They also displayed similar results, with both of the orders differing between the two groups and the minute-by-minute resolution showing a more pronounced distinction.
The figure demonstrates the values of the p-orders from the ARIMA model of the clean vs. artifact for each patient at (a) minute-by-minute resolution and (b) 10-min-by-10-min resolution. The blue circles correspond to the p-orders of the cleaned data, whereas the red crosses represent the p-orders of the artifact segment. If a red cross overlaps a blue circle, the value of the order for that patient is the same. If they do not overlap, the values differ.
ARIMA, autoregressive integrated moving average; RAP, compensatory reserve index.
As seen from the figures, there are only a few patient examples wherein the clean and artifact segment orders overlap in the minute-by-minute resolution (Figure 3a). The majority of them differ, confirming that the optimal models for the parameters of clean and artifact segments are quite distinct. In the case of the 10-min resolution data, although many instances show non-overlapping orders, there are more examples of overlap compared to the minute-by-minute resolution. Scatterplots for RAP q-order and the rest of the signals are demonstrated in Appendix F Figure A6, Figure A7 and Figure A8. They also display similar results, with most of the orders differing between the two groups and the minute-by-minute resolution showing a more pronounced distinction.
To assess the success rate of artifact identification, the sliding window method was applied at the patient level. For minute-by-minute data, a window size of 100 with a sample size of 50 was used, while for 10-min-by-10-min data, a window size of 50 with a sample size of 25 was employed. Within each window, the optimal ARIMA model was calculated, and artifacts were identified in the window if any of the calculated orders (p, d, or q) differed by more than three from those of the clean data optimal model. Using this approach, the average success rates for artifact identification were 65.258% for ICP, 65.258% for AMP, and 84.038% for RAP at the minute-by-minute resolution. The average success rates for artifact identification at the 10-min-by-10-min resolution were 55.336% for ICP, 54.128% for AMP, and 43.089% for RAP. Table A36 and Table A37 of Appendix G depict the average success rates for artifact identification in both temporal resolutions.

3.4.2. Comparing the Residuals

Using the median optimal model described in Table 5, the residuals of clean data and artifact segments were calculated for all patients. The difference between the two groups was determined using the Mann–Whitney U test for each patient. The result is summarized below, where significant corresponds to p < 0.05 and insignificant is otherwise.
As seen from the table, most cases showed significant differences at the minute-by-minute resolution while comparing clean residuals with artifact residuals. On the contrary, the result was the opposite in the 10-min temporal resolution, with the majority of examples belonging to the insignificant group.
While calculating residuals, a few patient examples had inadequate data points (1 patient at the minute-by-minute data resolution for ICP and 13 patients at the 10 min data resolution across all signals). Consequently, the residuals for those patients could not be calculated, and the analysis was carried out excluding them.
Additionally, to consider residuals as a feature to identify artifacts, the residuals of all the clean data should be low. In other words, they need to be consistent and should be fitted by the median optimal ARIMA model calculated for the clean data. To check this, the variance of the residuals of each patient was calculated (Table 6). The same was done for the artifact data (whose expected variance should be higher). The median and mean values of variance of each group were calculated as shown below.
As shown in the table, the expected outcome was observed for both resolutions. Particularly, ICP showed the largest difference among the signals. However, the median results of AMP at the 10-min-by-10-min data resolution deviated from the expected result.
The sliding window method was applied at the patient level to evaluate the success rate of artifact identification for this feature. A window size of 50 with a sample size of 25 was used for both minute-by-minute and 10-min-by-10-min resolution. At first, the variance of residuals within each window was calculated, and artifacts were identified if the variance of residuals exceeded the median variance of the total data for a single patient. Using this method, the average success rates for identifying artifacts across the entire population were 70.212% for ICP, 56.916% for AMP and 91.666% for RAP at the minute-by-minute resolution, and 85.092% for ICP, 74.264% for AMP and 84.411% for RAP at the 10-min-by-10-min resolution, as illustrated in Table A36 and Table A37 of Appendix G.

3.4.3. Comparing the Cross-Correlation of Residuals

The groups for this analysis were formed as outlined in Section 2.7.2. After calculating the cross-correlation of total signals for each case and patient, the maximum values from the results were recorded. Next, the median and mean values of the maximum cross-correlation between RAP and ICP/AMP residuals were calculated across the total population for both the clean and artifact cases, as follows below.
Table 7 demonstrates that for the minute-by-minute data, the maximum RAP–AMP cross-correlation of residuals was expectedly higher in clean–clean cases compared to clean–artifact cases, based on both median and mean values. However, this was not the case for RAP–ICP; even though the mean value of clean–clean cases was slightly higher, the median was lower. On the other hand, for the 10-min-by-10-min data, none of the clean–clean cases had considerably higher values in RAP–ICP (median and mean) cross-correlation. In contrast, RAP–AMP cross-correlation showed higher values in clean–clean cases in terms of both median and mean.
A Mann–Whitney U test was subsequently performed to compare the two groups—maximum cross-correlation of clean RAP residuals with clean ICP/AMP residuals vs. clean RAP residuals with artifact ICP/AMP residuals. For RAP–ICP, the p-values were 0.02809 for the minute-by-minute resolution and 0.31919 for the 10 min resolution. In contrast, for RAP–AMP, the p-values were close to 0 for both resolutions.
Additionally, the maximum cross-correlations of the two groups (i.e., RAP–ICP clean–clean residuals vs. clean–artifact residuals and RAP–AMP clean–clean residuals vs. clean–artifact residuals) were compared at the patient level. The expected result was that the clean–clean maximum cross-correlation of residuals should be greater than the clean–artifact maximum cross-correlation of residuals, as explained in Section 2.7.2. The numbers of patients (out of 108 patients in total) in each case that showed greater values in clean–clean cases are as follows: (i) RAP–ICP, 34 cases and (ii) RAP–AMP, 95 cases at the minute-by-minute resolution; (i) RAP–ICP, 41 cases and (ii) RAP–AMP, 69 cases at the 10-min-by-10-min resolution.
The outcome of this analysis aligns with the findings of the overall (median and mean) result presented in Table 7, showing that the RAP–AMP cross-correlation at the minute-by-minute resolution demonstrated the greatest number of patients (95 cases) with higher values of maximum cross-correlation in clean–clean cases, alongside RAP–AMP cross-correlation at the 10-min-by-10-min resolution demonstrating 69 cases. On the contrary, RAP–ICP failed to achieve such large numbers at both resolutions.
In the success rate findings of this feature, RAP–ICP and RAP–AMP cross-correlations were calculated within each window. The window sizes and sample sizes were similar to the previous feature (i.e., 50 and 25, respectively). Artifacts were predicted within a window if the maximum cross-correlation was lower than the median of the maximum cross-correlation values between clean and artifact groups of the total recording for a single patient. Using this method, the median success rates for identifying artifacts across the entire population were 37.011% for RAP–ICP and 61.6% for RAP–AMP cross-correlation at the minute-by-minute resolution, whereas at the 10-min-by-10-min resolution, they were 6.512% and 35.829%, respectively.

4. Discussion

We set out to explore the RAP compensatory reserve index, derived from ICP pressure sensors, to better understand some critical aspects of such cerebral data streams. First, we comprehensively characterized the general nature of RAP signals with respect to other cerebral physiologic parameters, including subgroup analysis. Second, we outlined the time-series statistical structures of RAP in relation to its constituent signals (ICP and AMP). Finally, we leveraged our enhanced understanding of the time-series structures of RAP data streams to explore signal artifact detection. Throughout this process, some important aspects of RAP and the use of such sensor data streams deserve to be highlighted.

4.1. RAP’s Patterns and Behaviours

First, based on the results in Appendix A, TBI patients generally demonstrated an impaired compensatory reserve, as they spent most of their time within the range of 0.4 to 1, as measured by the RAP index (illustrated in Table A2 of Appendix A), corresponding to state 2 of RAP [19], as defined in Section 3.2.1. Regarding age comparison, Table A3 and Table A4 of Appendix A indicate that RAP increased with age. For Marshall CT grades, grades I through IV represent progressively worsening brain injuries [15]; thus, RAP would be expected to increase from grade I to IV, as supported by the analysis in Table A7 of Appendix A. In grade V, patients underwent brain surgery whereby mass lesions were removed [15]. This may or may not have resulted in a higher RAP than grade IV, depending on the surgery’s outcome, and can explain the reduced RAP value observed in grade V.

4.2. Time Series Structure Analysis

Second, during the time series analysis, it was clear that RAP signal sources were non-stationary and carried substantial trend features inherent within their data streams. We were able to demonstrate this across two different temporal resolutions of RAP data, emphasizing that this was present even at low temporal resolutions. This is critical for the future use of RAP in physiologic modeling, as not accounting for such a trend would lead to model inaccuracies, and most work in the field to date ignores such features.
RAP data streams displayed inherent autoregressive features, consistent with optimal ARIMA models with non-zero autocorrelative and moving average orders (p-orders and q-orders, respectively). Also of interest, the optimal ARIMA model orders for RAP differed from both ICP and AMP, and its constituent signals, highlighting that RAP contains different information compared to ICP or AMP alone. This was the case across the population, highlighting again the need to account not just for the data trend, but also for more complex autoregressive features, in future modeling using temporally resolved RAP data. However, it must be noted that the median optimal model calculated for the dataset may not accurately represent all patients. For instance, RAP at minute-by-minute resolution had a median optimal ARIMA model of (3, 1, 3). However, one patient individually obtained an optimal ARIMA model (8, 1, 3). Hence, applying the ARIMA (3, 1, 3) model to this patient’s RAP signal may not effectively capture the data’s structure due to the substantial difference in the p-order. Examining this patient’s ACF and PACF plots shown in Figure A5 of Appendix E reveals spikes between lags 0 to 5 that fall outside the confidence intervals, highlighting further limitations of using the median optimal ARIMA model. Nevertheless, the spikes out of the confidence intervals had very small magnitudes compared to the spikes seen in the ACF and PACF plots from the original data. Therefore, the median optimal ARIMA model obtained in this analysis could contribute to the identification of the features that helped distinguish clean data from artifact segments.

4.3. Comparison Among Different Resolutions

Third, during ARIMA model generation, including stationarity tests, some examples failed to return a p-value due to insufficient data points, which were most commonly observed at the hour-by-hour temporal resolution. Similarly, most of the non-stationary results were also found at this lowest resolution in both the original and differenced data. Additionally, while calculating the optimal ARIMA model for each signal of each patient, some cases failed to yield results due to insufficient data, mainly at lower resolutions. These observations highlight the critical role of data point quantity in each step of determining the optimal ARIMA model. It also suggests that lower resolutions may be associated with higher residuals, indicating a comparatively less accurate model. The medians of the residuals for each resolution were calculated with the results summarized in Table A32 of Appendix E. All of these findings emphasize the importance of a proper understanding of the statistical structures of such data streams from pressure sensors and their derived metrics (such as RAP). Throughout Table 2, the loss of RAP lags can be observed in the median optimal ARIMA models for lower resolutions (i.e., order numbers are smaller). Additionally, Table 5 and Table 6 show the lower importance of artifact management, since the difference between clean and artificial groups was not significantly different at lower resolutions. This suggests that the lower resolutions lose the dynamic aspects of the data (ICP/AMP/RAP).
This trend can also be observed in Table A24 of Appendix D, which details the optimal models for each signal and resolution for each patient. Lower resolutions tend to have simpler optimal models with lower order (p, d, q) values, leading to underfitting. This occurred because the ARIMA analysis, constrained by fewer data points, could not find a suitable model to capture the data fully. In contrast, higher resolutions, with more data points, yielded better results. The presence of spikes with higher magnitudes in the ACF and PACF plots of residuals at lower resolutions from Figure 2 and Appendix F further supports this statement.

4.4. Identifying Artifacts

Finally, building on the results from the time-series modeling of RAP, ICP, and AMP, we aimed to identify potential features capable of distinguishing artifacts from clean data. To qualify as a potential identifier of artifact profiles, a feature must show significant differences between the clean and artifact groups in every case; for instance, in a Mann–Whitney U-test analysis, the p-value between the two groups should be less than 0.05. Firstly, according to Table 4, the p-values for ICP q-order, AMP p-order, and RAP p-orders and q-orders were less than 0.05 (i.e., significant difference) while comparing optimal ARIMA models of clean and artifact data at the minute-by-minute resolution, suggesting that these orders are strong candidates for identifying artifacts. Conversely, ICP p-orders and AMP q-orders from the optimal models could be excluded as potential features due to insignificant differences between the clean and artifact groups (p-value > 0.05). However, at the 10-min-by-10-min data resolution, only the q-order of optimal ARIMA models of ICP (p-value = close to 0) and AMP (p-value = 0.00032) proved to be a potential distinguishing factor, while other orders showed no significant differences.
Secondly, while comparing the residuals of clean and artifact profiles at the patient level, Table 5 shows that the majority of cases exhibited significant differences for each signal at the minute-by-minute resolution. Specifically, significant differences were observed in 63, 64, and 65 cases out of 108 for ICP, AMP, and RAP, respectively. In contrast, at the 10-min-by-10-min resolution, most cases showed no significant differences for all signals. This indicates that though residuals could be a strong feature for distinguishing artifact profiles at the minute-by-minute resolution, they are less effective at the 10 min resolution. Table 6 further supports this finding, as the medians and means of the variance of residuals across the population were consistently lower for clean data and higher for artifact segments at both resolutions. This consistency suggests that clean data were moderately well-modeled. Therefore, residuals could be considered as a reliable feature for artifact identification.
The third and final analysis focused on comparing the maximum cross-correlation of residuals between clean–clean and clean–artifact combinations for RAP–ICP and RAP–AMP. This analysis was conducted in three parts. It was hypothesized that the maximum cross-correlation between clean RAP and clean ICP/AMP residuals would be higher than that between clean RAP and artifact ICP/AMP residuals, as RAP is derived from ICP and AMP, and their residuals are expected to exhibit strong correlations. Firstly, the medians and means of the maximum cross-correlations were calculated. Among these, only the RAP–AMP cross-correlation consistently showed higher values in clean–clean cases for both median and mean. Thus, the RAP–AMP maximum cross-correlation emerged as a potential feature for both minute-by-minute and 10-min-by-10-min resolutions. Secondly, a Mann–Whitney U test was performed across the entire population to compare the groups. The test revealed significant differences (p < 0.05) between clean–clean and clean–artifact residuals for each case except RAP–ICP at the 10-min-by-10-min resolution. Finally, maximum cross-correlations were compared at the patient level, with the expectation that clean–clean maximum cross-correlations would be greater than clean–artifact correlations. This was confirmed for RAP–AMP cross-correlation at both the minute-by-minute and 10-min-by-10-min resolutions, where the majority of patients exhibited higher clean–clean values. In conclusion, combining these three parts, between RAP–ICP and RAP–AMP, the cross-correlation of the latter at both resolutions could serve as a strong feature for identifying artifacts.
Fourthly, a detailed treatment-based sub-group assessment is required. This analysis did not include the effects of different therapeutic interventions, such as decompressive craniectomy, pCO2 changes or mannitol infusion. Though ICP treatments have an immediate impact on ICP (the minutes after treatment), their long-term impact on ICP modeling and other derived ICP measures (like PRx) is quite limited [45,46,47]. Therefore, when modeling and assessing RAP physiological factors over larger periods of time and over whole populations, ICP treatment factors can likely be largely ignored. However, when robust minute-by-minute RAP is being modeled (looking at individual moments of patient state), these factors should be considered.
Finally, while the success rate of capturing artifacts showed promising results, some non-artifact data points were mistakenly identified as artifacts (i.e., false positives). The number of false positives at each parameter and each analysis is demonstrated in Table A36 and Table A37 of Appendix G. Removing these non-artifact data points could result in the loss of valuable information from the signal. Further work is needed to address this issue, either by refining the thresholds and parameters in the sliding window approach, or by utilizing machine learning (ML) methods and incorporating these identified features into the model.

5. Limitations

The population sample size is relatively small despite representing the largest study to date comprehensively characterizing RAP data features. Such small sample sizes limit the ability to extrapolate such findings to other populations where ICP sensor technology is applied, and RAP can be measured. For instance, as discussed in the previous section, the median optimal model identified for the clean data may not fully represent all patients. Secondly, the number of data points for each patient constrains the results at lower resolutions. The reduction in data points at lower resolutions, due to calculation methods, led many optimal models at these resolutions to return ARIMA (1, 1, 1), indicating insufficient data points to capture the signal structure and resulting in underfitting. This is supported by the table showing higher residuals at lower resolutions (Table A31 of Appendix E). Additionally, several examples failed to return optimal ARIMA models, residuals, or p-values in the Mann–Whitney U-test, further decreasing the data size at lower resolutions. Moreover, it remains unclear why RAP at lower resolutions did not show significant order differences between clean and artifact groups, while RAP at higher resolutions did. This could be due to RAP’s derivation method, which results in 80% overlapping data, or due to insufficient data points at lower resolutions. Thirdly, the heterogeneity in TBI characteristics and the diversity of treatments administered could have influenced the physiological response observed in the signals, which might make it difficult to identify consistent patterns and draw generalized conclusions Finally, the data originate from a single-center archive, limiting generalizability, as findings may not apply to other centers with different patient populations, treatment protocols, or equipment.

6. Future Directions

Future work on ICP pressure sensor-based signal sources, including RAP, needs to include larger multi-center high-frequency signal databases. With improved sample sizes, the validation of the above general RAP behavior, its time-series structure and artifact detection methods need to occur. Such future work could include non-linear methods and future sub-group analysis based on injury or disease patterns. Further, artifact detection methods could be enhanced to include not just the time-series methods explored within this manuscript, but also layered approaches, including signal morphological assessments, wavelet decomposition methods, and ML techniques. Finally, for RAP data to be temporally modeled, a proper understanding of its time-domain statistical features is key. Such larger multi-center studies would be optimally positioned to define RAP statistical features more robustly.

7. Conclusions

RAP signals, derived from ICP sensor technology, displayed reproducible and characteristic patterns in this population of moderate/severe TBI patients, with most displaying features of impaired compensatory reserve. The time-series statistical features of RAP demonstrated inherent autoregressive features and data trends, regardless of temporal resolution. Such time-domain statistical features of RAP signals can be used to identify artifactual segments in RAP data streams. Future work is required in larger populations to validate such findings.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, F.A.Z.; methodology, A.I. and F.A.Z.; data curation, A.S.S., K.Y.S., A.G. and T.B.; writing—original draft, A.I.; writing—review and editing, A.S.S., K.Y.S., N.V., A.G., N.S., T.B., M.H., L.F. and F.A.Z.; supervision, F.A.Z.; funding acquisition, F.A.Z. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was directly supported through the University of Manitoba Endowed Manitoba Public Insurance (MPI) Chair in Neuroscience and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC; ALLRP-578524-22, ALLRP 597708-24).

Institutional Review Board Statement

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee (University of Manitoba Research Ethics Board; H2017:1818, H2017:188, H2020:118) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent Statement

For this type of study, formal consent is not required. No identifying participant information is present in this study.

Data Availability Statement

Data are contained within the article.

Acknowledgments

FAZ is supported through the Endowed Manitoba Public Insurance (MPI) Chair in Neuroscience/TBI Research Endowment, NSERC (DGECR-2022-00260, RGPIN-2022-03621, ALLRP-578524-22, ALLRP-576386-22, I2IPJ 586104-23, ALLRP 586244-23, ALLRP 590680-2023, ALLRP 597442-24, ALLRP 597708-24), Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), the MPI Neuroscience Research Operating Fund, the Health Sciences Centre Foundation Winnipeg, the Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI) (Project #: 38583), Research Manitoba (Grant #: 3906, 5429, 5914) and the Pan Am Clinic Foundation of Winnipeg. AI is supported through NSERC (ALLRP-578524-22). ASS is supported through NSERC (RGPIN-2022-03621). NV is supported by the University of Manitoba Graduate Fellowship (UMGF)—Biomedical Engineering, NSERC (ALLRP-576386-22, ALLRP 586244-23, ALLRP 597442-24), AG is supported by the CIHR Fellowship Program. KYS is supported through the NSERC CGS-D program (CGS D-579021-2023), University of Manitoba R.G. and E.M. Graduate Fellowship (Doctoral) in Biomedical Engineering, and the University of Manitoba MD/PhD program. NS is support through the University of Manitoba Graduate Fellowship (UMGF)—Human Anatomy and Cell Science. TB is supported through the NSERC CGS-M program and NSERC (ALLRP-578524-22), University of Manitoba Graduate Enhancement of Tri-Agency Stipends (GETS) program. MH is supported through Research Manitoba (Grant #: 5429). LF is supported through the NSERC Post-Doctoral Fellowship (PDF) program.

Conflicts of Interest

F.A.Z. currently has NSERC Alliance Advantage grant support in partnership with Medtronic’s Patient Monitoring Division for work that is in part related to this manuscript. Funding from the partner organization is provided to match NSERC governmental funding only, in keeping with NSERC policies. Medtronic does not direct the research objectives, data collection, analysis, interpretation or publication of the findings in any way. All other authors assert that they have no conflicts of interest to disclose regarding this work, confirming the absence of any financial interests, affiliations, or personal relationships that may have influenced or biased this research.

Abbreviations

ADF, Augmented Dickey–Fuller; AMP, pulse amplitude of ICP; ARIMA, auto-regressive integrated moving average; ICP, intracranial pressure; KPSS, Kwiatkowski–Phillips–Schmidt–Shin; MAP, mean arterial blood pressure; RAP, compensatory reserve index; std, standard deviation.

Appendix A. Summary Measurements, Time Spent Within Thresholds, and Analysis of ICP/AMP/RAP

The following appendix contains the tables for summary measurements and percentage of time spent within certain thresholds, across the whole population. All the significant p-values were marked bold.
AMP, pulse amplitude of ICP; CPP, cerebral perfusion pressure; CT, computed tomography; GOSE, Glasgow outcome scale-extended; ICP, intracranial pressure; MAP, mean arterial blood pressure; PRx, pressure reactivity index; RAP, compensatory reserve index; std, standard deviation.
Table A1. Summary measurements.
Table A1. Summary measurements.
MetricsICPMAPCPPAMPRAP
mean10.81885.37474.5552.2440.632
std7.56413.88114.0491.8550.483
min−150.035−34.260−1
25%6.13876.6966.50050.99770.49635
50%10.1783.9473.031.7110.8578
75%14.7492.6581.692.910.9646
max80.06200197.36222.411
Table A2. Time spent within threshold.
Table A2. Time spent within threshold.
RangesTime Spent (Unit)% Time SpentTotal Time (Unit)
[0.4, 1]267.57878.091342.646
(0, 0.4)30.8899.014
[0, −1]43.16612.597
Table A3. Sub-group analysis—age (first comparison).
Table A3. Sub-group analysis—age (first comparison).
ConditionICPMAPCPPAMPRAP
Below 40 years
(n = 46)
10.56481 ± 6.8524184.44187 ± 7.3612173.68225 ± 7.944641.71982 ± 1.214500.60043 ± 0.18153
Above 40 years
(n = 63)
8.51253 ± 6.6383284.07349 ± 7.7057076.12142 ± 8.495702.40335 ± 1.827180.53754 ± 0.20982
p-value0.0478520.7104930.1367930.0652270.119867
Table A4. Sub-group analysis—age (second comparison).
Table A4. Sub-group analysis—age (second comparison).
ConditionICPMAPCPPAMPRAP
Below 40 years
(n = 46)
10.56481 ± 6.8524184.44187 ± 7.3612173.68225 ± 7.944641.71982 ± 1.214500.60043 ± 0.18153
Between 40 and 60 years
(n = 39)
8.71919 ± 7.1283586.03822 ± 8.0376477.66581 ± 9.361772.21371 ± 1.618250.59274 ± 0.19015
Above 60 years
(n = 24)
8.17672 ± 5.8862080.88080 ± 6.0119373.61179 ± 6.256692.71151 ± 2.124380.44784 ± 0.21301
p-value0.283990.028180.053230.046240.00459
Table A5. Sub-group analysis—M/F Sex.
Table A5. Sub-group analysis—M/F Sex.
ConditionICPMAPCPPAMPRAP
Male (n = 89)8.90705 ± 6.3072984.74958 ± 7.9012176.15799 ± 8.246572.02947 ± 1.541730.55111 ± 0.20298
Female (n = 20)11.47718 ± 8.4244881.91215 ± 5.1207470.34861 ± 7.025432.49502 ± 1.961190.62181 ± 0.17918
p-value0.3336280.1924170.008050.4835150.164657
Table A6. Sub-group analysis—pupillary response.
Table A6. Sub-group analysis—pupillary response.
ConditionICPMAPCPPAMPRAP
Bilat Reactive
(n = 65)
9.68200 ± 6.3255384.11428 ± 7.3452674.95088 ± 7.445972.25631 ± 1.766520.59983 ± 0.19003
Bilat Unreactive
(n = 19)
7.21860 ± 6.6251085.25445 ± 10.4355077.67136 ± 10.398401.84440 ± 1.388510.51583 ± 0.19264
Unilateral Unreactive
(n = 25)
10.23149 ± 7.8885183.74773 ± 5.3372373.49879 ± 8.630511.95276 ± 1.414530.50780 ± 0.21717
p-value0.295190.793780.253270.535570.07446
Table A7. Sub-group analysis—Marshall CT grade.
Table A7. Sub-group analysis—Marshall CT grade.
ConditionICPMAPCPPAMPRAP
Grade II (n = 3)8.41885 ± 1.4650288.19054 ± 2.9534879.67350 ± 4.206261.10567 ± 0.323600.53874 ± 0.23926
Grade III (n = 31)10.10747 ± 5.7516485.77724 ± 7.9922175.28605 ± 6.888242.34405 ± 1.303440.65335 ± 0.16089
Grade IV (n = 20)13.85727 ± 7.6194186.37602 ± 7.2450773.34250 ± 8.892013.30238 ± 2.282330.67305 ± 0.16134
Grade V (n = 55)7.39158 ± 6.4115282.35945 ± 7.1835875.36899 ± 9.008991.60895 ± 1.281460.47552 ± 0.19312
p-value0.002270.064800.605160.000280.00001
Table A8. Sub-group analysis—alive/dead (1-month GOSE).
Table A8. Sub-group analysis—alive/dead (1-month GOSE).
ConditionICPMAPCPPAMPRAP
Alive (n = 71)8.08183 ± 5.2027084.54202 ± 7.8765876.48282 ± 8.446771.65068 ± 1.014780.57072 ± 0.19835
Dead (n = 38)11.98871 ± 8.4504683.68252 ± 7.0195472.27488 ± 7.387692.96776 ± 2.156090.55279 ± 0.20754
p-value0.0334850.6687840.0319110.0028650.604539
Table A9. Sub-group analysis—favorable/unfavorable (1-month GOSE).
Table A9. Sub-group analysis—favorable/unfavorable (1-month GOSE).
ConditionICPMAPCPPAMPRAP
Favourable (n = 52)7.29237 ± 5.3026384.20479 ± 7.9012877.03737 ± 8.746211.44024 ± 0.791480.54361 ± 0.20245
Unfavorable (n = 57)11.46599 ± 7.3634784.27194 ± 7.3088673.11250 ± 7.461222.73982 ± 1.946070.58373 ± 0.19920
p-value0.0018831.00.0163480.0003580.294478
Table A10. Sub-group analysis—alive/dead (6-month GOSE).
Table A10. Sub-group analysis—alive/dead (6-month GOSE).
ConditionICPMAPCPPAMPRAP
Alive (n = 68)8.42374 ± 5.1819184.72952 ± 7.9824076.32846 ± 8.456651.66250 ± 1.027500.58264 ± 0.19200
Dead (n = 41)11.37039 ± 8.4737983.53319 ± 7.2724872.68237 ± 7.722362.83479 ± 2.128790.53877 ± 0.21121
p-value0.1697410.5628490.0654480.0100510.258864
Table A11. Sub-group analysis—favorable/unfavorable (6-month GOSE).
Table A11. Sub-group analysis—favorable/unfavorable (6-month GOSE).
ConditionICPMAPCPPAMPRAP
Favourable (n = 25)8.12572 ± 5.1466684.64676 ± 8.0982376.55841 ± 8.592831.67795 ± 1.042720.57845 ± 0.19602
Unfavorable (n = 64)11.61034 ± 8.2357783.83620 ± 6.7206272.72268 ± 7.473572.77978 ± 2.101870.54720 ± 0.20960
p-value0.0485010.7386880.0417010.014560.4034
Table A12. ICP thresholds.
Table A12. ICP thresholds.
ConditionICPMAPCPPAMPRAP
ICP > 2228.34662 ± 7.1264991.16469 ± 17.0871262.81109 ± 17.588974.99916 ± 3.263140.72418 ± 0.43710
ICP < 209.34625 ± 5.6168284.79938 ± 13.4805175.54584 ± 13.342312.06319 ± 1.570500.62705 ± 0.48596
p-valueClose to 0Close to 0Close to 0Close to 0Close to 0
Table A13. AMP thresholds.
Table A13. AMP thresholds.
ConditionICPMAPCPPAMPRAP
AMP < 16.99299 ± 5.6941184.26304 ± 14.0350777.38008 ± 13.745750.58311 ± 0.261640.43376 ± 0.55036
1 < AMP < 310.94096 ± 7.5845385.39152 ± 13.8938774.56503 ± 14.067392.31228 ± 1.936350.63582 ± 0.48283
AMP > 315.60541 ± 8.3354186.79509 ± 14.6380871.22871 ± 14.816925.01951 ± 1.903600.78769 ± 0.36104
p-valueClose to 0Close to 0Close to 0Close to 0Close to 0
Table A14. PRx thresholds (first comparison).
Table A14. PRx thresholds (first comparison).
ConditionICPMAPCPPAMPRAPPRx
PRx < 010.44394 ± 6.5320185.41019 ± 12.9004174.88617 ± 12.820142.22166 ± 1.736850.68340 ± 0.44809−0.42581 ± 0.26188
PRx > 011.25437 ± 8.5693685.55157 ± 14.9994674.20460 ± 15.287732.27123 ± 1.982140.57066 ± 0.519770.42869 ± 0.27811
p-valueClose to 0Close to 0Close to 0Close to 0Close to 0Close to 0
Table A15. PRx thresholds (second comparison).
Table A15. PRx thresholds (second comparison).
ConditionICPMAPCPPAMPRAPPRx
PRx < 0.2510.82641 ± 7.5730385.47692 ± 13.9308974.56473 ± 14.042172.24505 ± 1.856820.63016 ± 0.48653−0.02201 ± 0.50469
PRx > 0.2511.77002 ± 9.1367485.55960 ± 15.7481873.67751 ± 16.116012.34873 ± 2.091500.55701 ± 0.529970.57686 ± 0.21250
p-valueClose to 0Close to 0Close to 00.002642Close to 0Close to 0

Appendix B. Stationarity Test Analysis—ADF/KPSS Tests for Original and Differenced Data

The following are specific p-values for stationary tests at the minute-by-minute resolution, confirming that, for the most part, the data were stationary after the first ordered differencing for both ADF and KPSS tests.
ADF, Augmented Dickey–Fuller; AMP, pulse amplitude of ICP; ICP, intracranial pressure; KPSS, Kwiatkowski–Phillips–Schmidt–Shin; RAP, compensatory reserve index.
Table A16. ADF test p-values for original data at the minute-by-minute resolution.
Table A16. ADF test p-values for original data at the minute-by-minute resolution.
PatientICPAMPRAP
TBI_001close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_002close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_0030.010.16close to 0
TBI_004close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_0070.020.59close to 0
TBI_0080.33close to 0close to 0
TBI_009close to 00.08close to 0
TBI_010close to 00.01close to 0
TBI_011close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_012close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_0130.190.14close to 0
TBI_0140.980.72close to 0
TBI_015close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_0160.040.01close to 0
TBI_0170.030.09close to 0
TBI_0180.550.17close to 0
TBI_0190.470.250.03
TBI_020close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_0210.580.22close to 0
TBI_0220.020.02close to 0
TBI_023close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_024close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_0250.260.27close to 0
TBI_026close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_0270.120.16close to 0
TBI_028close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_029close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_030close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_0310.10.04close to 0
TBI_0320.230.05close to 0
TBI_033close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_0340.010.01close to 0
TBI_036close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_037close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_038close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_039close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_040close to 00.02close to 0
TBI_041close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_042close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_043close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_0440.030.1close to 0
TBI_045close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_046close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_047close to 00.14close to 0
TBI_0480.540.63close to 0
TBI_049close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_050close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_0510.330.42close to 0
TBI_0520.680.12close to 0
TBI_0530.010.01close to 0
TBI_0540.050.01close to 0
TBI_055close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_0560close to 0close to 0
TBI_057close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_0580close to 0close to 0
TBI_0590.060.05close to 0
TBI_060close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_061close to 00.08close to 0
TBI_0620.010.27close to 0
TBI_063close to 00.01close to 0
TBI_06400.42close to 0
TBI_0650.030.04close to 0
TBI_0660close to 0close to 0
TBI_067close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_06800.12close to 0
TBI_069close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_0700.420.99close to 0
TBI_071close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_0720.050.37close to 0
TBI_073close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_074close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_075close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_076close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_077close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_078close to 00.28close to 0
TBI_0790.49close to 0close to 0
TBI_080close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_081close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_0820.720.17close to 0
TBI_0830.020.06close to 0
TBI_0840.050.06close to 0
TBI_085close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_086close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_0870.010.06close to 0
TBI_088close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_089close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_09000.01close to 0
TBI_091close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_092close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_093close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_0940.57close to 0close to 0
TBI_095close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_0960.29close to 0close to 0
TBI_0970.020.04close to 0
TBI_098close to 00.01close to 0
TBI_099close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_100close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_1010.55close to 0close to 0
TBI_1020.020.2close to 0
TBI_103close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_104close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_1050.04close to 0close to 0
TBI_106close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_1070.1close to 0close to 0
TBI_108close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_1090.01close to 0close to 0
TBI_110close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_111close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_1120.07close to 0close to 0
Table A17. KPSS test p-values for original data at minute-by-minute resolution.
Table A17. KPSS test p-values for original data at minute-by-minute resolution.
PatientICPAMPRAP
TBI_0010.010.010.01
TBI_0020.010.010.01
TBI_0030.010.010.01
TBI_0040.080.10.1
TBI_0070.010.010.1
TBI_0080.010.070.1
TBI_0090.010.010.01
TBI_0100.10.010.01
TBI_0110.010.010.01
TBI_0120.020.010.1
TBI_0130.030.070.1
TBI_0140.010.010.01
TBI_0150.010.010.1
TBI_0160.010.010.01
TBI_0170.010.10.1
TBI_0180.010.010.01
TBI_0190.010.010.01
TBI_0200.010.010.01
TBI_0210.010.010.01
TBI_0220.010.010.01
TBI_0230.010.010.01
TBI_0240.010.010.02
TBI_0250.010.010.1
TBI_0260.030.010.01
TBI_0270.10.10.01
TBI_0280.010.10.01
TBI_0290.010.010.01
TBI_0300.010.010.1
TBI_0310.030.050.01
TBI_0320.010.010.08
TBI_0330.010.020.03
TBI_0340.010.010.01
TBI_0360.010.010.01
TBI_0370.010.010.01
TBI_0380.010.010.01
TBI_0390.010.010.01
TBI_0400.010.010.02
TBI_0410.010.010.1
TBI_0420.010.020.01
TBI_0430.010.010.09
TBI_0440.010.010.1
TBI_0450.010.010.01
TBI_0460.010.010.1
TBI_0470.010.010.1
TBI_0480.010.010.01
TBI_0490.010.010.1
TBI_0500.010.10.1
TBI_0510.010.010.1
TBI_0520.010.010.01
TBI_0530.010.010.01
TBI_0540.020.010.1
TBI_0550.010.010.01
TBI_0560.020.10.1
TBI_0570.010.010.01
TBI_0580.010.010.01
TBI_0590.010.010.01
TBI_0600.010.010.01
TBI_0610.010.010.1
TBI_0620.010.010.07
TBI_0630.010.010.1
TBI_0640.010.010.01
TBI_0650.010.010.01
TBI_0660.010.010.01
TBI_0670.10.090.1
TBI_0680.010.010.01
TBI_0690.010.010.01
TBI_0700.010.010.02
TBI_0710.010.010.01
TBI_0720.010.010.01
TBI_0730.10.010.01
TBI_0740.010.010.01
TBI_0750.050.010.01
TBI_0760.010.010.1
TBI_0770.10.10.01
TBI_0780.020.010.1
TBI_0790.010.010.01
TBI_0800.010.010.1
TBI_0810.010.020.01
TBI_0820.010.010.02
TBI_0830.010.010.01
TBI_0840.010.010.1
TBI_0850.010.010.1
TBI_0860.010.010.01
TBI_0870.010.010.01
TBI_0880.020.010.01
TBI_0890.010.010.01
TBI_0900.010.020.01
TBI_0910.010.010.01
TBI_0920.010.010.01
TBI_0930.010.010.01
TBI_0940.010.010.09
TBI_0950.010.010.01
TBI_0960.10.10.01
TBI_0970.010.010.05
TBI_0980.010.010.05
TBI_0990.020.010.01
TBI_1000.050.010.02
TBI_1010.010.010.01
TBI_1020.010.010.01
TBI_1030.010.010.02
TBI_1040.010.010.01
TBI_1050.010.010.01
TBI_1060.010.010.1
TBI_1070.010.090.01
TBI_1080.010.010.01
TBI_1090.090.010.1
TBI_1100.010.010.01
TBI_1110.010.010.01
TBI_1120.010.010.02
Table A18. ADF test p-values for differenced data at minute-by-minute resolution.
Table A18. ADF test p-values for differenced data at minute-by-minute resolution.
PatientICPAMPRAP
TBI_001close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_002close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_003close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_004close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_007close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_008close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_009close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_010close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_011close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_012close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_013close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_014close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_015close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_016close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_017close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_018close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_019close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_020close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_021close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_022close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_023close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_024close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_025close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_026close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_027close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_028close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_029close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_030close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_031close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_032close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_033close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_034close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_036close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_037close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_038close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_039close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_040close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_041close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_042close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_043close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_044close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_045close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_046close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_047close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_048close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_049close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_050close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_051close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_052close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_053close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_054close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_055close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_056close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_057close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_058close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_059close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_060close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_061close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_062close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_063close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_064close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_065close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_066close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_067close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_068close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_069close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_070close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_071close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_072close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_073close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_074close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_075close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_076close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_077close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_078close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_079close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_080close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_081close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_082close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_083close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_084close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_085close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_086close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_087close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_088close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_089close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_090close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_091close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_092close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_093close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_094close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_095close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_0960.05close to 0close to 0
TBI_097close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_098close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_099close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_100close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_101close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_102close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_103close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_104close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_105close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_106close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_107close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_108close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_109close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_110close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_111close to 0close to 0close to 0
TBI_112close to 0close to 0close to 0
Table A19. KPSS test p-values for differenced data at minute-by-minute resolution.
Table A19. KPSS test p-values for differenced data at minute-by-minute resolution.
PatientICPAMPRAP
TBI_0010.10.10.1
TBI_0020.10.10.1
TBI_0030.10.10.1
TBI_0040.10.10.06
TBI_0070.10.10.1
TBI_0080.10.10.1
TBI_0090.10.10.1
TBI_0100.10.10.1
TBI_0110.10.10.1
TBI_0120.10.10.1
TBI_0130.10.10.1
TBI_0140.090.10.1
TBI_0150.10.10.1
TBI_0160.10.10.1
TBI_0170.10.10.1
TBI_0180.10.10.1
TBI_0190.10.10.1
TBI_0200.10.10.1
TBI_0210.10.10.1
TBI_0220.10.10.1
TBI_0230.10.10.1
TBI_0240.10.10.1
TBI_0250.10.10.1
TBI_0260.10.10.1
TBI_0270.10.10.1
TBI_0280.10.10.1
TBI_0290.10.10.1
TBI_0300.10.10.1
TBI_0310.10.10.1
TBI_0320.10.10.1
TBI_0330.10.10.1
TBI_0340.10.10.1
TBI_0360.10.10.1
TBI_0370.10.10.1
TBI_0380.10.10.1
TBI_0390.10.10.1
TBI_0400.10.10.1
TBI_0410.10.10.1
TBI_0420.10.10.1
TBI_0430.10.10.1
TBI_0440.10.10.1
TBI_0450.10.10.1
TBI_0460.10.10.1
TBI_0470.10.10.1
TBI_0480.10.10.1
TBI_0490.10.10.1
TBI_0500.10.10.1
TBI_0510.10.10.1
TBI_0520.10.10.1
TBI_0530.10.10.1
TBI_0540.10.10.1
TBI_0550.10.10.1
TBI_0560.10.10.1
TBI_0570.10.10.1
TBI_0580.10.10.1
TBI_0590.10.10.1
TBI_0600.10.10.1
TBI_0610.10.10.1
TBI_0620.10.10.1
TBI_0630.10.10.1
TBI_0640.10.10.1
TBI_0650.10.10.1
TBI_0660.10.10.05
TBI_0670.10.10.1
TBI_0680.10.10.1
TBI_0690.10.10.1
TBI_0700.10.040.1
TBI_0710.10.10.1
TBI_0720.10.10.1
TBI_0730.10.10.1
TBI_0740.10.10.1
TBI_0750.10.10.1
TBI_0760.10.10.1
TBI_0770.10.10.1
TBI_0780.10.10.1
TBI_0790.10.10.1
TBI_0800.10.10.1
TBI_0810.10.10.1
TBI_0820.10.10.1
TBI_0830.10.10.1
TBI_0840.10.10.1
TBI_0850.10.10.1
TBI_0860.10.10.1
TBI_0870.10.10.1
TBI_0880.10.10.1
TBI_0890.10.10.1
TBI_0900.10.10.1
TBI_0910.10.10.1
TBI_0920.10.10.1
TBI_0930.10.10.1
TBI_0940.10.10.1
TBI_0950.10.10.1
TBI_0960.10.10.1
TBI_0970.10.10.1
TBI_0980.10.10.1
TBI_0990.10.10.1
TBI_1000.10.10.1
TBI_1010.10.10.1
TBI_1020.10.10.1
TBI_1030.10.10.1
TBI_1040.10.10.1
TBI_1050.10.10.1
TBI_1060.10.10.1
TBI_1070.10.10.1
TBI_1080.10.10.1
TBI_1090.10.10.1
TBI_1100.10.10.1
TBI_1110.10.10.1
TBI_1120.10.10.1

Appendix C. Summary of Stationarity Analysis Tests—ADF/KPSS Tests for Original and Differenced Data

This appendix highlights that after first-ordered differencing was applied, overall, the data became stationary at each resolution.
ADF, Augmented Dickey–Fuller; AMP, pulse amplitude of ICP; ICP, intracranial pressure; KPSS, Kwiatkowski–Phillips–Schmidt–Shin; RAP, compensatory reserve index.
Table A20. Stationarity check of the original data based on ADF.
Table A20. Stationarity check of the original data based on ADF.
ParameterMinute-by-Minute10-min-by-10-min30-min-by-30-minHour-by-Hour
StationaryNon-StationaryN/AStationaryNon-StationaryN/AStationaryNon-StationaryN/AStationaryNon-StationaryN/A
ICP86230664306049051553
AMP80290585105257048583
RAP10900931607633069373
Table A21. Stationarity check of the original data based on KPSS.
Table A21. Stationarity check of the original data based on KPSS.
ParameterMinute-by-Minute10-min-by-10-min30-min-by-30-minHour-by-Hour
StationaryNon-StationaryN/AStationaryNon-StationaryN/AStationaryNon-StationaryN/AStationaryNon-StationaryN/A
ICP81010337604960059491
AMP13960347504861054541
RAP33760466305653057520
Table A22. Stationarity check of the first difference data based on ADF.
Table A22. Stationarity check of the first difference data based on ADF.
ParameterMinute-by-Minute10-min-by-10-min30-min-by-30-minHour-by-Hour
StationaryNon-StationaryN/AStationaryNon-StationaryN/AStationaryNon-StationaryN/AStationaryNon-StationaryN/A
ICP10810106301044191144
AMP10900108101017189164
RAP10900107201008192134
Table A23. Stationarity check of the first difference data based on KPSS.
Table A23. Stationarity check of the first difference data based on KPSS.
ParameterMinute-by-Minute10-min-by-10-min30-min-by-30-minHour-by-Hour
StationaryNon-StationaryN/AStationaryNon-StationaryN/AStationaryNon-StationaryN/AStationaryNon-StationaryN/A
ICP1090010810106309883
AMP1081010540105409973
RAP10810103601009093133

Appendix D. Optimal ARIMA Models for Each Signal and Each Patient

The following shows the most significant ARIMA models (as informed through AIC) at individual patient levels for each resolution and each signal. Each cell has four values corresponding to p, d and q orders and associated AIC values for the model. m refers to minute and h refers to hour.
AIC, Akaike information criterion; AMP, pulse amplitude of ICP; ARIMA, autoregressive integrated moving average; ICP, intracranial pressure; RAP, compensatory reserve index.
Table A24. Optimal ARIMA models.
Table A24. Optimal ARIMA models.
PatientICP m-by-mICP 10-m-by-10-mICP 30-m-by-30-mICP h-by-hAMP m-by-mAMP 10-m-by-10-mAMP 30-m-by-30-mAMP h-by-hRAP m-by-mRAP 10-m-by-10-mRAP 30-m-by-30-mRAP h-by-h
TBI_001[10, 1, 3, ‘1531.771’][6, 1, 1, ‘4255.733’][4, 1, 3, ‘1522.509’][2, 1, 4, ‘788.013’][1, 1, 9, ‘35487.221’][6, 1, 1, ‘1332.552’][3, 1, 1, ‘498.284’][6, 1, 7, ‘265.408’][2, 1, 5, ‘14862.477’][6, 1, 5, ‘−192.534’][6, 1, 5, ‘−243.988’][1, 1, 1, ‘−186.431’]
TBI_002[4, 1, 1, ‘301.383’][3, 1, 1, ‘798.246’][2, 1, 4, ‘312.842’][2, 1, 3, ‘165.722’][9, 1, 4, ‘7043.873’][1, 1, 2, ‘390.750’][8, 1, 1, ‘22.000’][5, 1, 1, ‘99.766’][9, 1, 3, ‘2469.440’][2, 1, 1, ‘−52.852’][1, 1, 1, ‘−55.084’][1, 1, 1, ‘−29.913’]
TBI_003[6, 1, 1, ‘1091.937’][4, 1, 3, ‘609.108’][1, 1, 2, ‘221.819’][1, 1, 5, ‘123.989’][1, 1, 5, ‘3681.918’][2, 1, 2, ‘−613.493’][2, 1, 1, ‘−213.387’][4, 1, 1, ‘−86.515’][3, 1, 1, ‘−5762.879’][3, 1, 4, ‘102.301’][1, 1, 1, ‘10.314’][1, 1, 2, ‘−5.858’]
TBI_004[1, 1, 1, ‘33.269’][8, 1, 5, ‘19.483’][2, 1, 1, ‘−15.142’][1, 1, 1, ‘−5.331’][1, 1, 1, ‘339.517’][10, 1, 1, ‘−8.337’][3, 1, 1, ‘−24.703’][1, 1, 1, ‘−12.050’][1, 1, 1, ‘68.348’][1, 1, 1, ‘7.550’][3, 1, 1, ‘4.856’][1, 1, 1, ‘−10.030’]
TBI_007[2, 1, 1, ‘337.225’][1, 1, 1, ‘341.530’][1, 1, 1, ‘121.113’][1, 1, 1, ‘58.863’][1, 1, 1, ‘2403.149’][1, 1, 1, ‘−42.308’][1, 1, 1, ‘−21.910’][10, 1, 2, ‘−29.149’][1, 1, 1, ‘66.362’][1, 1, 1, ‘29.447’][1, 1, 2, ‘1.014’][9, 1, 5, ‘2.568’]
TBI_008[7, 1, 2, ‘1230.670’][6, 1, 7, ‘640.823’][1, 1, 1, ‘292.706’][1, 1, 1, ‘170.699’][8, 1, 1, ‘3091.271’][1, 1, 5, ‘−234.704’][1, 1, 3, ‘−51.200’][1, 1, 1, ‘−6.116’][6, 1, 1, ‘−3794.499’][1, 1, 1, ‘133.499’][2, 1, 3, ‘19.027’][1, 1, 2, ‘−0.816’]
TBI_009[3, 1, 1, ‘5942.191’][3, 1, 1, ‘2728.697’][2, 1, 5, ‘1043.663’][7, 1, 2, ‘567.291’][5, 1, 8, ‘17479.477’][2, 1, 5, ‘−198.338’][2, 1, 3, ‘37.041’][4, 1, 4, ‘77.012’][3, 1, 5, ‘−4518.618’][2, 1, 3, ‘405.306’][6, 1, 8, ‘−28.212’][3, 1, 5, ‘−54.206’]
TBI_010[2, 1, 1, ‘−609.152’][2, 1, 8, ‘829.657’][2, 1, 4, ‘339.936’][1, 1, 1, ‘174.663’][4, 1, 10, ‘4585.005’][8, 1, 2, ‘421.414’][1, 1, 3, ‘208.454’][1, 1, 1, ‘111.955’][2, 1, 8, ‘1342.374’][2, 1, 4, ‘−123.974’][1, 1, 1, ‘−106.847’][2, 1, 3, ‘−67.124’]
TBI_011[9, 1, 2, ‘2021.678’][4, 1, 1, ‘3969.556’][8, 1, 7, ‘34.000’][2, 1, 3, ‘616.790’][3, 1, 10, ‘34337.153’][5, 1, 5, ‘1322.034’][10, 1, 10, ‘472.085’][2, 1, 3, ‘262.872’][2, 1, 7, ‘10386.355’][9, 1, 1, ‘−66.064’][4, 1, 5, ‘−104.843’][3, 1, 5, ‘−120.804’]
TBI_012[3, 1, 1, ‘120.069’][3, 1, 3, ‘932.354’][2, 1, 1, ‘350.342’][2, 1, 4, ‘190.127’][10, 1, 10, ‘6289.455’][3, 1, 4, ‘170.531’][1, 1, 3, ‘99.561’][1, 1, 1, ‘57.176’][3, 1, 4, ‘615.635’][1, 1, 1, ‘34.510’][6, 1, 3, ‘−57.594’][2, 1, 3, ‘−41.261’]
TBI_013[3, 1, 1, ‘−704.728’][1, 1, 1, ‘285.451’][2, 1, 1, ‘129.206’][10, 1, 4, ‘61.929’][2, 1, 4, ‘1008.086’][1, 1, 1, ‘116.816’][5, 1, 2, ‘59.733’][10, 1, 6, ‘11.389’][2, 1, 4, ‘−430.580’][1, 1, 1, ‘−111.659’][1, 1, 1, ‘−49.679’][1, 1, 1, ‘−30.654’]
TBI_014[5, 1, 2, ‘913.826’][6, 1, 2, ‘705.939’][1, 1, 1, ‘341.638’][1, 1, 4, ‘200.105’][8, 1, 7, ‘3008.562’][4, 1, 1, ‘170.705’][7, 1, 3, ‘80.471’][3, 1, 2, ‘53.547’][7, 1, 8, ‘−803.703’][1, 1, 1, ‘149.620’][1, 1, 4, ‘25.501’][1, 1, 1, ‘−6.100’]
TBI_015[9, 1, 1, ‘3613.128’][4, 1, 10, ‘3273.361’][10, 1, 8, ‘1261.074’][7, 1, 2, ‘711.312’][10, 1, 9, ‘15518.215’][6, 1, 7, ‘887.067’][10, 1, 9, ‘464.622’][2, 1, 8, ‘316.652’][9, 1, 9, ‘−2847.042’][4, 1, 1, ‘325.832’][2, 1, 1, ‘53.187’][1, 1, 1, ‘24.501’]
TBI_016[2, 1, 1, ‘701.730’][4, 1, 5, ‘577.298’][2, 1, 2, ‘190.466’][1, 1, 1, ‘108.708’][7, 1, 7, ‘32.000’][2, 1, 6, ‘92.695’][1, 1, 1, ‘30.722’][1, 1, 1, ‘12.994’][9, 1, 10, ‘1331.935’][3, 1, 5, ‘35.309’][1, 1, 1, ‘1.111’][1, 1, 1, ‘2.441’]
TBI_017[1, 1, 1, ‘889.808’][1, 1, 2, ‘841.047’][2, 1, 3, ‘274.709’][1, 1, 1, ‘142.480’][8, 1, 8, ‘2882.115’][5, 1, 6, ‘−46.309’][3, 1, 2, ‘−9.950’][6, 1, 1, ‘−11.021’][9, 1, 10, ‘−116.108’][5, 1, 5, ‘144.457’][1, 1, 1, ‘12.939’][2, 1, 3, ‘7.099’]
TBI_018[1, 1, 5, ‘752.011’][1, 1, 3, ‘433.669’][2, 1, 2, ‘178.075’][6, 1, 1, ‘91.705’][9, 1, 9, ‘2441.415’][1, 1, 2, ‘−13.491’][1, 1, 1, ‘8.642’][1, 1, 1, ‘7.812’][3, 1, 4, ‘−629.140’][3, 1, 3, ‘89.550’][3, 1, 1, ‘26.384’][1, 1, 4, ‘11.223’]
TBI_019[1, 1, 4, ‘498.112’][2, 1, 6, ‘408.893’][1, 1, 1, ‘148.683’][1, 1, 1, ‘82.831’][6, 1, 9, ‘3812.284’][4, 1, 3, ‘13.428’][1, 1, 3, ‘8.181’][1, 1, 1, ‘8.756’][5, 1, 7, ‘−287.769’][8, 1, 7, ‘18.908’][2, 1, 2, ‘−3.921’][2, 1, 3, ‘−5.043’]
TBI_020[8, 1, 1, ‘1784.103’][8, 1, 3, ‘4486.602’][2, 1, 9, ‘1865.086’][1, 1, 2, ‘1012.086’][8, 1, 3, ‘28969.156’][1, 1, 3, ‘5.157’][2, 1, 4, ‘357.707’][1, 1, 1, ‘256.960’][8, 1, 10, ‘−17023.134’][3, 1, 1, ‘−23.169’][9, 1, 2, ‘−194.386’][2, 1, 2, ‘−182.112’]
TBI_021[6, 1, 1, ‘1098.804’][1, 1, 2, ‘2075.738’][3, 1, 4, ‘862.914’][1, 1, 3, ‘477.400’][9, 1, 10, ‘9002.559’][1, 1, 3, ‘−1094.246’][1, 1, 2, ‘−174.995’][1, 1, 1, ‘−30.954’][3, 1, 10, ‘−13874.873’][1, 1, 2, ‘−105.751’][1, 1, 2, ‘−195.491’][1, 1, 1, ‘−112.378’]
TBI_022[10, 1, 2, ‘4169.616’][3, 1, 4, ‘2732.960’][6, 1, 8, ‘1014.211’][4, 1, 3, ‘570.046’][5, 1, 8, ‘17558.366’][6, 1, 3, ‘−1294.473’][1, 1, 2, ‘−303.740’][2, 1, 4, ‘−117.154’][8, 1, 8, ‘−14891.883’][1, 1, 2, ‘339.065’][1, 1, 1, ‘−4.223’][1, 1, 1, ‘−54.605’]
TBI_023[2, 1, 1, ‘1588.588’][5, 1, 8, ‘2102.452’][3, 1, 1, ‘722.915’][2, 1, 5, ‘342.677’][4, 1, 1, ‘10881.139’][2, 1, 2, ‘286.001’][3, 1, 8, ‘109.017’][7, 1, 10, ‘51.368’][3, 1, 5, ‘−5418.788’][1, 1, 1, ‘140.425’][4, 1, 4, ‘−45.122’][4, 1, 3, ‘−65.264’]
TBI_024[4, 1, 2, ‘772.025’][2, 1, 2, ‘1977.338’][2, 1, 7, ‘759.301’][2, 1, 4, ‘405.739’][1, 1, 5, ‘9235.961’][3, 1, 7, ‘213.528’][4, 1, 8, ‘193.197’][2, 1, 4, ‘94.872’][6, 1, 8, ‘−3654.987’][5, 1, 1, ‘46.978’][3, 1, 2, ‘−101.452’][1, 1, 1, ‘−52.779’]
TBI_025[5, 1, 4, ‘813.208’][5, 1, 7, ‘673.930’][1, 1, 1, ‘246.431’][1, 1, 1, ‘128.190’][7, 1, 1, ‘536.739’][2, 1, 1, ‘−187.712’][1, 1, 1, ‘−67.705’][1, 1, 1, ‘−45.265’][2, 1, 3, ‘−3299.656’][1, 1, 1, ‘182.025’][4, 1, 5, ‘−2.759’][1, 1, 1, ‘−20.589’]
TBI_026[7, 1, 1, ‘5398.748’][3, 1, 1, ‘3079.708’][4, 1, 10, ‘1065.744’][1, 1, 1, ‘561.883’][5, 1, 6, ‘27609.011’][4, 1, 7, ‘884.406’][3, 1, 9, ‘277.779’][3, 1, 3, ‘109.451’][1, 1, 2, ‘12092.375’][2, 1, 1, ‘282.125’][2, 1, 3, ‘−83.756’][1, 1, 1, ‘−79.607’]
TBI_027[5, 1, 1, ‘122.719’][6, 1, 6, ‘3432.804’][6, 1, 9, ‘1294.061’][3, 1, 8, ‘688.991’][1, 1, 1, ‘1913.341’][8, 1, 9, ‘1810.299’][5, 1, 5, ‘757.074’][1, 1, 1, ‘417.487’][5, 1, 5, ‘24.000’][3, 1, 2, ‘46.304’][1, 1, 1, ‘−5.930’][4, 1, 1, ‘−57.306’]
TBI_028[10, 1, 1, ‘3115.825’][6, 1, 5, ‘2481.023’][2, 1, 8, ‘789.797’][5, 1, 3, ‘388.397’][7, 1, 8, ‘17153.619’][1, 1, 1, ‘558.722’][3, 1, 1, ‘152.829’][2, 1, 1, ‘70.552’][1, 1, 6, ‘872.965’][1, 1, 1, ‘228.778’][2, 1, 1, ‘−3.613’][2, 1, 4, ‘−26.064’]
TBI_029[5, 1, 1, ‘3549.700’][9, 1, 9, ‘3676.162’][7, 1, 5, ‘1466.528’][2, 1, 2, ‘810.891’][3, 1, 2, ‘16689.107’][4, 1, 6, ‘1817.830’][7, 1, 4, ‘763.579’][2, 1, 4, ‘467.189’][2, 1, 10, ‘11026.043’][3, 1, 1, ‘323.412’][1, 1, 1, ‘−38.610’][3, 1, 1, ‘−57.485’]
TBI_030[1, 1, 1, ‘689.969’][2, 1, 5, ‘1440.883’][3, 1, 3, ‘521.747’][2, 1, 5, ‘265.548’][1, 1, 4, ‘10910.172’][2, 1, 1, ‘424.745’][6, 1, 1, ‘178.014’][6, 1, 1, ‘95.864’][2, 1, 3, ‘1378.543’][1, 1, 1, ‘125.002’][1, 1, 1, ‘−38.493’][1, 1, 1, ‘−42.582’]
TBI_031[2, 1, 1, ‘110.431’][1, 1, 1, ‘116.934’][8, 1, 9, ‘38.000’][1, 1, 1, ‘0.909’][1, 1, 1, ‘633.083’][9, 1, 1, ‘65.009’][4, 1, 1, ‘24.710’][1, 1, 1, ‘−5.600’][1, 1, 3, ‘133.559’][10, 1, 1, ‘12.878’][1, 1, 1, ‘4.687’][1, 1, 1, ‘−12.100’]
TBI_032[3, 1, 1, ‘1373.186’][4, 1, 6, ‘1243.360’][10, 1, 5, ‘448.944’][1, 1, 5, ‘229.956’][10, 1, 9, ‘8316.565’][8, 1, 6, ‘414.222’][3, 1, 3, ‘179.034’][2, 1, 2, ‘88.697’][1, 1, 8, ‘1870.893’][1, 1, 1, ‘90.492’][2, 1, 3, ‘11.638’][1, 1, 1, ‘−14.844’]
TBI_033[1, 1, 3, ‘1446.406’][1, 1, 2, ‘556.279’][1, 1, 2, ‘185.070’][1, 1, 1, ‘85.864’][1, 1, 4, ‘4367.810’][1, 1, 1, ‘−196.827’][1, 1, 6, ‘−67.299’][1, 1, 1, ‘−27.247’][2, 1, 4, ‘−1988.852’][1, 1, 1, ‘134.205’][1, 1, 1, ‘19.728’][1, 1, 3, ‘0.756’]
TBI_034[3, 1, 1, ‘1534.139’][2, 1, 5, ‘608.336’][1, 1, 1, ‘246.840’][1, 1, 1, ‘136.863’][6, 1, 9, ‘2876.342’][2, 1, 1, ‘−560.840’][9, 1, 1, ‘−168.536’][1, 1, 1, ‘−77.134’][6, 1, 6, ‘−6995.116’][1, 1, 1, ‘118.680’][1, 1, 1, ‘14.645’][1, 1, 1, ‘13.331’]
TBI_036[8, 1, 1, ‘1070.938’][5, 1, 7, ‘6284.400’][1, 1, 1, ‘2438.594’][1, 1, 1, ‘1340.666’][10, 1, 10, ‘29070.777’][10, 1, 8, ‘2447.168’][1, 1, 1, ‘1382.036’][1, 1, 4, ‘838.793’][10, 1, 10, ‘−5956.178’][1, 1, 1, ‘−40.093’][1, 1, 1, ‘−233.931’][1, 1, 1, ‘−128.070’]
TBI_037[6, 1, 1, ‘2029.214’][1, 1, 1, ‘3174.555’][6, 1, 9, ‘1047.098’][4, 1, 6, ‘548.494’][1, 1, 9, ‘26139.197’][1, 1, 2, ‘692.762’][1, 1, 9, ‘231.005’][7, 1, 1, ‘122.810’][7, 1, 1, ‘3980.163’][6, 1, 7, ‘186.534’][2, 1, 3, ‘−50.336’][1, 1, 1, ‘−22.760’]
TBI_038[1, 1, 3, ‘1137.245’][3, 1, 10, ‘3651.071’][2, 1, 5, ‘1274.656’][6, 1, 5, ‘642.687’][4, 1, 7, ‘24104.256’][2, 1, 8, ‘1418.069’][1, 1, 1, ‘563.827’][6, 1, 5, ‘272.605’][1, 1, 10, ‘6255.177’][1, 1, 1, ‘163.865’][1, 1, 1, ‘−51.497’][1, 1, 1, ‘−89.936’]
TBI_039[8, 1, 1, ‘1246.661’][1, 1, 1, ‘1373.530’][3, 1, 3, ‘441.113’][1, 1, 5, ‘210.307’][1, 1, 9, ‘9913.909’][1, 1, 2, ‘461.798’][3, 1, 3, ‘117.948’][1, 1, 1, ‘45.445’][1, 1, 4, ‘2137.736’][1, 1, 1, ‘147.763’][1, 1, 5, ‘26.651’][6, 1, 1, ‘2.691’]
TBI_040[6, 1, 1, ‘1058.681’][1, 1, 3, ‘2388.786’][1, 1, 1, ‘928.918’][4, 1, 2, ‘447.237’][1, 1, 5, ‘17070.922’][3, 1, 4, ‘507.213’][1, 1, 1, ‘284.378’][8, 1, 2, ‘117.861’][2, 1, 1, ‘−475.122’][1, 1, 2, ‘98.532’][1, 1, 1, ‘−51.851’][1, 1, 1, ‘−46.974’]
TBI_041[6, 1, 1, ‘1725.814’][1, 1, 1, ‘2322.222’][1, 1, 1, ‘887.819’][2, 1, 2, ‘490.180’][6, 1, 8, ‘15273.113’][1, 1, 3, ‘218.837’][1, 1, 1, ‘131.967’][1, 1, 1, ‘103.582’][6, 1, 9, ‘−4903.485’][3, 1, 1, ‘215.685’][1, 1, 4, ‘−37.146’][3, 1, 1, ‘−31.963’]
TBI_042[3, 1, 3, ‘2374.186’][1, 1, 1, ‘1491.790’][1, 1, 2, ‘497.446’][1, 1, 4, ‘256.675’][4, 1, 5, ‘12487.824’][4, 1, 1, ‘275.034’][3, 1, 3, ‘64.228’][1, 1, 1, ‘40.204’][5, 1, 5, ‘3175.527’][2, 1, 3, ‘229.795’][2, 1, 7, ‘7.164’][1, 1, 1, ‘−5.512’]
TBI_043[9, 1, 1, ‘2253.945’][1, 1, 1, ‘583.359’][1, 1, 1, ‘232.064’][1, 1, 1, ‘124.113’][3, 1, 3, ‘4389.474’][1, 1, 1, ‘−742.371’][1, 1, 1, ‘−232.103’][1, 1, 3, ‘−113.272’][3, 1, 4, ‘−7498.478’][1, 1, 2, ‘159.959’][1, 1, 1, ‘22.316’][1, 1, 1, ‘4.356’]
TBI_044[5, 1, 1, ‘863.795’][3, 1, 4, ‘712.394’][2, 1, 1, ‘274.918’][1, 1, 1, ‘159.557’][7, 1, 1, ‘5306.273’][2, 1, 1, ‘165.178’][2, 1, 1, ‘116.624’][1, 1, 1, ‘72.517’][5, 1, 2, ‘−377.611’][6, 1, 1, ‘70.514’][2, 1, 1, ‘−4.925’][1, 1, 1, ‘−1.222’]
TBI_045[3, 1, 1, ‘1084.027’][4, 1, 3, ‘1595.632’][7, 1, 9, ‘603.971’][3, 1, 2, ‘303.459’][9, 1, 1, ‘11149.290’][2, 1, 1, ‘125.979’][3, 1, 7, ‘126.147’][1, 1, 1, ‘65.471’][10, 1, 3, ‘−2520.470’][2, 1, 5, ‘13.006’][3, 1, 1, ‘−52.951’][1, 1, 1, ‘−34.911’]
TBI_046[2, 1, 1, ‘−376.596’][2, 1, 8, ‘745.024’][1, 1, 2, ‘291.109’][1, 1, 1, ‘153.518’][6, 1, 8, ‘3834.026’][2, 1, 10, ‘340.444’][1, 1, 4, ‘161.518’][1, 1, 2, ‘85.585’][4, 1, 1, ‘−513.709’][2, 1, 2, ‘−91.210’][1, 1, 1, ‘−80.802’][4, 1, 1, ‘−42.388’]
TBI_047[1, 1, 1, ‘2007.200’][3, 1, 1, ‘1124.876’][1, 1, 1, ‘414.130’][1, 1, 3, ‘209.099’][3, 1, 7, ‘8677.843’][7, 1, 10, ‘1.010’][1, 1, 7, ‘42.471’][1, 1, 3, ‘30.669’][4, 1, 7, ‘−144.422’][1, 1, 1, ‘179.101’][1, 1, 1, ‘25.246’][1, 1, 1, ‘8.012’]
TBI_048[3, 1, 7, ‘422.350’][1, 1, 1, ‘233.857’][2, 1, 3, ‘75.631’][1, 1, 1, ‘35.737’][1, 1, 1, ‘1613.809’][1, 1, 2, ‘−20.787’][3, 1, 1, ‘7.269’][7, 1, 1, ‘−1.320’][4, 1, 4, ‘−316.729’][3, 1, 2, ‘43.998’][8, 1, 2, ‘5.953’][5, 1, 6, ‘−11.224’]
TBI_049[8, 1, 2, ‘5376.289’][1, 1, 3, ‘1656.563’][5, 1, 1, ‘590.479’][4, 1, 2, ‘326.338’][9, 1, 1, ‘12735.921’][2, 1, 1, ‘−669.049’][1, 1, 9, ‘−206.879’][1, 1, 8, ‘−69.388’][2, 1, 8, ‘−7883.849’][1, 1, 2, ‘436.151’][3, 1, 3, ‘55.406’][1, 1, 1, ‘22.745’]
TBI_050[5, 1, 1, ‘944.591’][2, 1, 4, ‘543.931’][5, 1, 2, ‘177.022’][10, 1, 1, ‘74.081’][1, 1, 6, ‘4487.034’][6, 1, 9, ‘7.473’][1, 1, 1, ‘−7.671’][1, 1, 1, ‘2.830’][4, 1, 1, ‘−258.752’][2, 1, 4, ‘75.450’][2, 1, 1, ‘−19.339’][1, 1, 1, ‘−12.623’]
TBI_051[10, 1, 1, ‘1667.820’][2, 1, 2, ‘779.306’][1, 1, 1, ‘325.370’][2, 1, 1, ‘186.721’][1, 1, 1, ‘4609.700’][2, 1, 1, ‘−239.027’][1, 1, 1, ‘−43.043’][1, 1, 1, ‘−4.290’][1, 1, 1, ‘−3481.606’][1, 1, 2, ‘129.049’][1, 1, 1, ‘40.426’][1, 1, 2, ‘15.658’]
TBI_052[5, 1, 1, ‘1006.793’][1, 1, 1, ‘420.971’][3, 1, 1, ‘163.236’][2, 1, 4, ‘90.520’][4, 1, 1, ‘3439.819’][2, 1, 10, ‘−111.112’][2, 1, 6, ‘−6.848’][1, 1, 2, ‘−0.973’][1, 1, 2, ‘−412.020’][1, 1, 1, ‘120.369’][1, 1, 1, ‘33.371’][1, 1, 1, ‘16.747’]
TBI_053[10, 1, 1, ‘1936.359’][4, 1, 8, ‘1055.686’][2, 1, 4, ‘413.145’][2, 1, 3, ‘213.149’][1, 1, 5, ‘6752.862’][8, 1, 10, ‘−414.364’][3, 1, 1, ‘−69.436’][1, 1, 1, ‘−35.399’][9, 1, 5, ‘−8195.877’][3, 1, 7, ‘171.868’][6, 1, 1, ‘35.312’][3, 1, 3, ‘9.527’]
TBI_054[1, 1, 2, ‘97.217’][4, 1, 3, ‘248.705’][2, 1, 2, ‘98.762’][8, 1, 1, ‘47.618’][3, 1, 4, ‘2007.982’][2, 1, 2, ‘−69.739’][1, 1, 1, ‘2.627’][1, 1, 2, ‘9.658’][3, 1, 1, ‘−1096.791’][2, 1, 3, ‘−34.805’][9, 1, 2, ‘−27.100’][8, 1, 1, ‘−17.537’]
TBI_055[3, 1, 6, ‘3047.808’][1, 1, 1, ‘1387.897’][2, 1, 8, ‘532.821’][5, 1, 2, ‘289.671’][5, 1, 10, ‘11484.450’][1, 1, 4, ‘−662.759’][1, 1, 2, ‘−150.499’][4, 1, 1, ‘−56.964’][1, 1, 10, ‘−8744.441’][2, 1, 1, ‘240.594’][1, 1, 1, ‘28.482’][4, 1, 1, ‘14.028’]
TBI_056[3, 1, 10, ‘149.263’][8, 1, 1, ‘26.408’][2, 1, 2, ‘7.467’][None, 1, None, ‘inf’][1, 1, 2, ‘160.266’][6, 1, 1, ‘−13.890’][3, 1, 1, ‘−7.409’][None, 1, None, ‘inf’][2, 1, 1, ‘−138.260’][9, 1, 1, ‘17.316’][2, 1, 1, ‘−5.010’][None, 1, None, ‘inf’]
TBI_057[1, 1, 4, ‘226.678’][9, 1, 9, ‘7011.416’][5, 1, 2, ‘2492.357’][1, 1, 5, ‘1296.788’][1, 1, 10, ‘47415.546’][7, 1, 1, ‘2779.937’][1, 1, 10, ‘1061.677’][2, 1, 6, ‘588.615’][3, 1, 10, ‘14844.050’][5, 1, 1, ‘443.905’][1, 1, 1, ‘−340.513’][3, 1, 10, ‘−260.502’]
TBI_058[5, 1, 2, ‘2732.924’][1, 1, 1, ‘1432.209’][5, 1, 5, ‘570.988’][2, 1, 4, ‘308.583’][3, 1, 3, ‘10142.468’][2, 1, 2, ‘−44.341’][3, 1, 3, ‘100.081’][1, 1, 2, ‘70.793’][7, 1, 7, ‘−2675.763’][1, 1, 1, ‘146.171’][1, 1, 1, ‘−31.155’][2, 1, 3, ‘−28.780’]
TBI_059[1, 1, 2, ‘901.127’][2, 1, 2, ‘383.868’][9, 1, 2, ‘173.476’][8, 1, 1, ‘101.238’][3, 1, 2, ‘2550.066’][1, 1, 1, ‘−221.804’][1, 1, 3, ‘−80.575’][1, 1, 2, ‘−32.740’][1, 1, 1, ‘−741.986’][1, 1, 1, ‘73.161’][2, 1, 3, ‘0.247’][1, 1, 1, ‘−6.916’]
TBI_060[5, 1, 1, ‘1531.158’][1, 1, 2, ‘1363.277’][1, 1, 1, ‘485.037’][1, 1, 1, ‘218.728’][1, 1, 7, ‘9299.601’][1, 1, 5, ‘471.852’][1, 1, 1, ‘188.544’][1, 1, 1, ‘84.654’][6, 1, 1, ‘1608.989’][2, 1, 4, ‘35.108’][2, 1, 3, ‘−40.964’][1, 1, 1, ‘−37.416’]
TBI_061[1, 1, 4, ‘924.972’][3, 1, 2, ‘258.540’][1, 1, 1, ‘90.891’][2, 1, 3, ‘50.873’][2, 1, 1, ‘2468.625’][1, 1, 7, ‘−451.396’][1, 1, 3, ‘−131.510’][1, 1, 1, ‘−58.715’][2, 1, 1, ‘−3542.816’][2, 1, 1, ‘84.490’][1, 1, 1, ‘22.054’][6, 1, 1, ‘16.638’]
TBI_062[3, 1, 4, ‘840.774’][1, 1, 1, ‘401.476’][1, 1, 1, ‘144.057’][10, 1, 5, ‘59.231’][3, 1, 6, ‘2105.820’][3, 1, 7, ‘19.553’][1, 1, 5, ‘2.998’][3, 1, 1, ‘5.310’][9, 1, 7, ‘−1379.051’][3, 1, 3, ‘88.883’][1, 1, 3, ‘16.904’][6, 1, 1, ‘13.276’]
TBI_063[6, 1, 1, ‘1464.237’][1, 1, 1, ‘1489.315’][3, 1, 4, ‘475.502’][2, 1, 3, ‘249.235’][6, 1, 1, ‘8515.205’][1, 1, 2, ‘35.883’][8, 1, 1, ‘21.126’][1, 1, 2, ‘20.784’][5, 1, 1, ‘−1578.509’][2, 1, 2, ‘40.785’][5, 1, 6, ‘−59.043’][4, 1, 10, ‘−64.118’]
TBI_064[9, 1, 1, ‘813.256’][1, 1, 1, ‘274.303’][1, 1, 1, ‘101.098’][9, 1, 4, ‘45.068’][5, 1, 1, ‘2593.017’][2, 1, 2, ‘−79.875’][2, 1, 2, ‘−15.617’][6, 1, 2, ‘−1.653’][1, 1, 1, ‘−724.017’][1, 1, 1, ‘76.839’][1, 1, 1, ‘30.018’][1, 1, 1, ‘13.842’]
TBI_065[6, 1, 1, ‘439.493’][1, 1, 2, ‘465.404’][2, 1, 2, ‘170.347’][1, 1, 2, ‘83.113’][6, 1, 3, ‘3353.609’][1, 1, 1, ‘120.083’][1, 1, 2, ‘57.380’][9, 1, 1, ‘24.896’][10, 1, 7, ‘−13.545’][1, 1, 1, ‘10.605’][5, 1, 4, ‘−22.987’][2, 1, 2, ‘−22.768’]
TBI_066[8, 1, 1, ‘2979.779’][4, 1, 3, ‘1368.894’][3, 1, 3, ‘531.940’][10, 1, 2, ‘28.000’][5, 1, 2, ‘9401.210’][2, 1, 1, ‘−896.379’][2, 1, 3, ‘−243.850’][3, 1, 2, ‘−102.689’][7, 1, 2, ‘−11537.109’][1, 1, 1, ‘150.551’][1, 1, 1, ‘−66.236’][1, 1, 1, ‘−63.698’]
TBI_067[4, 1, 4, ‘384.851’][7, 1, 1, ‘385.927’][3, 1, 2, ‘133.193’][2, 1, 2, ‘78.913’][8, 1, 10, ‘3470.167’][2, 1, 10, ‘158.461’][1, 1, 3, ‘82.468’][6, 1, 1, ‘51.740’][2, 1, 5, ‘340.122’][1, 1, 1, ‘33.999’][2, 1, 1, ‘0.999’][1, 1, 2, ‘−4.503’]
TBI_068[4, 1, 6, ‘3658.594’][1, 1, 1, ‘1229.778’][1, 1, 2, ‘436.566’][2, 1, 1, ‘263.000’][3, 1, 1, ‘11219.746’][1, 1, 3, ‘−217.419’][4, 1, 4, ‘−0.259’][3, 1, 2, ‘13.244’][5, 1, 1, ‘−6317.538’][3, 1, 3, ‘296.879’][1, 1, 1, ‘−1.660’][2, 1, 1, ‘−32.790’]
TBI_069[9, 1, 1, ‘1746.409’][3, 1, 4, ‘4544.290’][9, 1, 8, ‘38.000’][1, 1, 1, ‘753.053’][1, 1, 3, ‘36583.517’][1, 1, 2, ‘1296.419’][4, 1, 7, ‘514.515’][7, 1, 7, ‘305.057’][5, 1, 1, ‘4522.254’][10, 1, 1, ‘15.428’][2, 1, 9, ‘−139.607’][1, 1, 4, ‘−129.456’]
TBI_070[5, 1, 1, ‘371.028’][1, 1, 4, ‘126.313’][9, 1, 4, ‘55.252’][5, 1, 2, ‘25.958’][5, 1, 5, ‘866.349’][1, 1, 1, ‘−26.652’][1, 1, 1, ‘−4.945’][5, 1, 1, ‘4.785’][1, 1, 3, ‘−282.991’][2, 1, 1, ‘49.412’][1, 1, 1, ‘19.752’][7, 1, 2, ‘12.056’]
TBI_071[9, 1, 2, ‘38.752’][7, 1, 4, ‘6316.318’][3, 1, 4, ‘2280.672’][1, 1, 1, ‘1201.920’][1, 1, 8, ‘44941.599’][2, 1, 2, ‘2622.449’][2, 1, 5, ‘1233.442’][3, 1, 3, ‘717.558’][8, 1, 3, ‘2079.592’][1, 1, 1, ‘−38.552’][1, 1, 10, ‘−347.219’][1, 1, 1, ‘−249.390’]
TBI_072[2, 1, 1, ‘701.818’][7, 1, 9, ‘36.000’][1, 1, 1, ‘233.732’][1, 1, 1, ‘119.949’][1, 1, 2, ‘3653.861’][6, 1, 9, ‘288.003’][2, 1, 3, ‘128.512’][1, 1, 1, ‘75.537’][8, 1, 10, ‘1476.957’][3, 1, 1, ‘75.470’][2, 1, 1, ‘−7.223’][3, 1, 1, ‘−2.434’]
TBI_073[8, 1, 3, ‘6044.737’][2, 1, 3, ‘5265.377’][8, 1, 9, ‘1972.521’][1, 1, 1, ‘1102.534’][1, 1, 9, ‘31152.953’][3, 1, 5, ‘−1026.621’][7, 1, 1, ‘163.573’][5, 1, 1, ‘226.264’][1, 1, 1, ‘−19788.132’][1, 1, 1, ‘602.585’][4, 1, 3, ‘−41.957’][5, 1, 3, ‘−96.271’]
TBI_074[5, 1, 3, ‘2033.327’][1, 1, 2, ‘2353.766’][1, 1, 1, ‘658.238’][1, 1, 1, ‘365.060’][3, 1, 2, ‘9292.142’][6, 1, 10, ‘−38.469’][2, 1, 2, ‘−1.884’][1, 1, 1, ‘7.819’][9, 1, 1, ‘1484.169’][1, 1, 1, ‘72.476’][4, 1, 7, ‘−44.283’][1, 1, 3, ‘−41.262’]
TBI_075[10, 1, 9, ‘1006.698’][8, 1, 10, ‘40.000’][1, 1, 1, ‘447.754’][1, 1, 1, ‘254.442’][2, 1, 8, ‘7379.604’][3, 1, 6, ‘244.269’][2, 1, 1, ‘110.424’][1, 1, 1, ‘63.610’][1, 1, 2, ‘1187.449’][3, 1, 3, ‘93.193’][1, 1, 1, ‘19.821’][2, 1, 4, ‘16.645’]
TBI_076[6, 1, 1, ‘2015.329’][1, 1, 2, ‘3795.065’][5, 1, 5, ‘1281.480’][3, 1, 6, ‘657.078’][2, 1, 9, ‘32735.636’][6, 1, 5, ‘668.983’][6, 1, 3, ‘223.408’][1, 1, 3, ‘113.712’][4, 1, 1, ‘7345.278’][3, 1, 1, ‘37.733’][2, 1, 1, ‘−171.251’][1, 1, 1, ‘−154.354’]
TBI_077[2, 1, 1, ‘2091.058’][1, 1, 1, ‘2098.357’][4, 1, 6, ‘694.607’][2, 1, 1, ‘347.893’][1, 1, 8, ‘16326.011’][3, 1, 3, ‘643.225’][1, 1, 2, ‘193.850’][2, 1, 4, ‘88.605’][9, 1, 1, ‘3221.436’][3, 1, 1, ‘119.313’][4, 1, 2, ‘−75.504’][1, 1, 10, ‘−38.655’]
TBI_078[3, 1, 1, ‘1499.557’][1, 1, 1, ‘561.375’][2, 1, 4, ‘208.265’][1, 1, 2, ‘113.232’][4, 1, 1, ‘3817.208’][3, 1, 9, ‘−312.053’][2, 1, 6, ‘−56.841’][2, 1, 2, ‘−9.575’][2, 1, 1, ‘−4448.552’][1, 1, 1, ‘131.781’][1, 1, 3, ‘−3.660’][2, 1, 2, ‘−12.584’]
TBI_079[9, 1, 3, ‘499.800’][1, 1, 1, ‘989.121’][2, 1, 3, ‘313.918’][2, 1, 2, ‘149.683’][4, 1, 5, ‘8679.081’][1, 1, 1, ‘140.132’][1, 1, 1, ‘78.511’][2, 1, 1, ‘56.192’][2, 1, 1, ‘−36.576’][4, 1, 1, ‘37.465’][3, 1, 4, ‘−45.035’][2, 1, 2, ‘−54.737’]
TBI_080[8, 1, 1, ‘8519.552’][3, 1, 1, ‘2914.104’][8, 1, 2, ‘1121.896’][3, 1, 4, ‘621.151’][1, 1, 9, ‘23574.334’][1, 1, 1, ‘−1450.861’][1, 1, 1, ‘−513.780’][1, 1, 1, ‘−215.740’][8, 1, 2, ‘−9852.278’][1, 1, 2, ‘532.785’][1, 1, 1, ‘−6.488’][3, 1, 1, ‘−65.627’]
TBI_081[6, 1, 2, ‘−192.512’][8, 1, 8, ‘5232.541’][5, 1, 6, ‘1827.975’][3, 1, 1, ‘900.265’][8, 1, 9, ‘41173.806’][3, 1, 4, ‘1931.642’][3, 1, 3, ‘771.634’][1, 1, 1, ‘385.392’][7, 1, 8, ‘3577.089’][1, 1, 1, ‘49.576’][1, 1, 1, ‘−249.189’][2, 1, 3, ‘−201.320’]
TBI_082[6, 1, 7, ‘30.000’][2, 1, 2, ‘324.380’][1, 1, 1, ‘121.923’][9, 1, 1, ‘72.337’][2, 1, 1, ‘2085.297’][1, 1, 3, ‘−106.536’][1, 1, 1, ‘−21.566’][10, 1, 5, ‘−15.568’][1, 1, 1, ‘−902.423’][1, 1, 1, ‘76.542’][1, 1, 3, ‘−0.877’][2, 1, 1, ‘−2.428’]
TBI_083[8, 1, 3, ‘1950.808’][4, 1, 4, ‘615.931’][6, 1, 3, ‘22.000’][1, 1, 1, ‘94.761’][1, 1, 3, ‘4618.665’][1, 1, 1, ‘−480.234’][1, 1, 1, ‘−177.361’][1, 1, 1, ‘−83.381’][3, 1, 1, ‘−3100.572’][1, 1, 6, ‘182.994’][2, 1, 1, ‘45.060’][1, 1, 1, ‘5.575’]
TBI_084[9, 1, 3, ‘2452.702’][1, 1, 1, ‘254.656’][3, 1, 3, ‘160.261’][7, 1, 4, ‘26.000’][1, 1, 3, ‘992.612’][1, 1, 1, ‘−724.082’][7, 1, 1, ‘−277.703’][2, 1, 1, ‘−150.735’][2, 1, 1, ‘−5710.491’][1, 1, 1, ‘227.432’][1, 1, 1, ‘38.168’][1, 1, 7, ‘−13.910’]
TBI_085[2, 1, 1, ‘1617.882’][9, 1, 8, ‘3805.534’][8, 1, 3, ‘1284.198’][2, 1, 1, ‘639.988’][1, 1, 6, ‘32483.590’][8, 1, 7, ‘282.638’][1, 1, 5, ‘273.116’][1, 1, 3, ‘156.721’][8, 1, 9, ‘−1157.248’][1, 1, 1, ‘−56.330’][1, 1, 2, ‘−220.808’][1, 1, 1, ‘−154.243’]
TBI_086[8, 1, 1, ‘3759.659’][4, 1, 9, ‘4333.346’][3, 1, 4, ‘1525.961’][3, 1, 2, ‘733.449’][7, 1, 3, ‘30851.610’][4, 1, 1, ‘43.771’][2, 1, 3, ‘84.952’][4, 1, 2, ‘−2.803’][10, 1, 1, ‘−7510.855’][1, 1, 2, ‘148.433’][3, 1, 1, ‘−142.687’][3, 1, 2, ‘−154.657’]
TBI_087[8, 1, 1, ‘3330.323’][1, 1, 2, ‘2362.099’][2, 1, 1, ‘1097.819’][1, 1, 2, ‘649.338’][3, 1, 7, ‘15117.197’][4, 1, 2, ‘−1591.208’][2, 1, 1, ‘−348.556’][1, 1, 6, ‘−92.731’][3, 1, 3, ‘−16709.147’][1, 1, 1, ‘99.391’][1, 1, 1, ‘−141.305’][1, 1, 3, ‘−131.817’]
TBI_088[8, 1, 2, ‘−3676.644’][3, 1, 4, ‘5733.186’][3, 1, 3, ‘1977.226’][2, 1, 1, ‘964.577’][1, 1, 8, ‘47020.336’][7, 1, 1, ‘1185.601’][3, 1, 5, ‘477.970’][1, 1, 1, ‘233.392’][10, 1, 2, ‘1892.864’][1, 1, 1, ‘−719.332’][5, 1, 1, ‘−385.957’][2, 1, 1, ‘−386.385’]
TBI_089[3, 1, 1, ‘5410.816’][1, 1, 2, ‘2767.672’][3, 1, 3, ‘830.000’][4, 1, 4, ‘499.134’][1, 1, 2, ‘26948.639’][1, 1, 1, ‘−898.413’][3, 1, 3, ‘−143.604’][1, 1, 2, ‘−26.113’][6, 1, 1, ‘−7917.505’][1, 1, 1, ‘361.620’][1, 1, 2, ‘−24.255’][2, 1, 10, ‘−63.433’]
TBI_090[1, 1, 2, ‘1496.104’][2, 1, 7, ‘2391.440’][5, 1, 2, ‘876.949’][1, 1, 1, ‘473.946’][4, 1, 8, ‘20812.777’][7, 1, 3, ‘605.383’][3, 1, 2, ‘270.077’][2, 1, 2, ‘171.229’][7, 1, 3, ‘1453.419’][1, 1, 1, ‘212.776’][2, 1, 3, ‘−36.092’][3, 1, 8, ‘−52.744’]
TBI_091[8, 1, 2, ‘−4326.074’][7, 1, 2, ‘6128.983’][1, 1, 6, ‘2341.587’][6, 1, 2, ‘1206.340’][8, 1, 5, ‘45969.072’][5, 1, 7, ‘2342.235’][7, 1, 2, ‘1126.075’][1, 1, 1, ‘621.492’][4, 1, 8, ‘9385.585’][6, 1, 8, ‘−668.544’][3, 1, 3, ‘−487.607’][2, 1, 2, ‘−315.631’]
TBI_092[10, 1, 1, ‘2866.928’][1, 1, 5, ‘3760.560’][5, 1, 4, ‘1400.699’][3, 1, 3, ‘733.603’][7, 1, 4, ‘32217.740’][3, 1, 4, ‘1543.450’][1, 1, 3, ‘685.049’][2, 1, 4, ‘393.198’][3, 1, 5, ‘5891.441’][7, 1, 2, ‘261.090’][3, 1, 2, ‘17.611’][1, 1, 1, ‘−56.554’]
TBI_093[10, 1, 1, ‘3214.846’][1, 1, 2, ‘5118.541’][1, 1, 1, ‘1505.439’][1, 1, 1, ‘757.552’][2, 1, 6, ‘46132.657’][3, 1, 1, ‘1003.610’][5, 1, 5, ‘24.000’][1, 1, 4, ‘180.726’][3, 1, 10, ‘10307.165’][1, 1, 2, ‘279.230’][2, 1, 2, ‘−66.665’][3, 1, 3, ‘−68.089’]
TBI_094[5, 1, 1, ‘1137.523’][6, 1, 6, ‘394.269’][4, 1, 2, ‘123.858’][2, 1, 1, ‘65.781’][7, 1, 3, ‘3598.210’][1, 1, 1, ‘54.721’][3, 1, 2, ‘−7.700’][1, 1, 1, ‘−1.032’][1, 1, 3, ‘1028.863’][1, 1, 1, ‘127.756’][2, 1, 3, ‘7.444’][1, 1, 1, ‘−6.719’]
TBI_095[1, 1, 2, ‘772.852’][1, 1, 1, ‘2364.346’][3, 1, 1, ‘910.020’][1, 1, 2, ‘520.535’][10, 1, 4, ‘20958.908’][1, 1, 3, ‘126.146’][9, 1, 6, ‘34.000’][2, 1, 10, ‘91.484’][10, 1, 2, ‘−1725.344’][4, 1, 9, ‘9.800’][1, 1, 1, ‘−138.419’][1, 1, 1, ‘−117.862’]
TBI_096[1, 1, 8, ‘176.761’][1, 1, 1, ‘96.413’][5, 1, 1, ‘16.524’][2, 1, 2, ‘6.240’][4, 1, 4, ‘714.264’][1, 1, 2, ‘34.204’][5, 1, 1, ‘−11.838’][5, 1, 1, ‘−5.110’][1, 1, 1, ‘119.360’][1, 1, 4, ‘4.547’][6, 1, 2, ‘−21.070’][2, 1, 1, ‘−4.530’]
TBI_097[1, 1, 3, ‘1772.148’][2, 1, 7, ‘539.291’][2, 1, 3, ‘254.764’][5, 1, 7, ‘155.859’][1, 1, 7, ‘2955.267’][3, 1, 3, ‘−861.808’][1, 1, 1, ‘−208.121’][1, 1, 1, ‘−77.235’][1, 1, 1, ‘−8073.485’][2, 1, 1, ‘164.963’][1, 1, 1, ‘−8.749’][1, 1, 4, ‘−11.313’]
TBI_098[8, 1, 2, ‘3516.109’][1, 1, 2, ‘1453.918’][2, 1, 2, ‘495.557’][3, 1, 3, ‘271.226’][2, 1, 9, ‘7701.261’][9, 1, 6, ‘−722.735’][2, 1, 6, ‘−292.401’][1, 1, 6, ‘−156.646’][6, 1, 4, ‘−7365.467’][3, 1, 1, ‘291.945’][2, 1, 2, ‘7.306’][5, 1, 5, ‘−6.385’]
TBI_099[10, 1, 1, ‘4428.079’][4, 1, 6, ‘1044.266’][2, 1, 4, ‘381.526’][1, 1, 1, ‘201.112’][2, 1, 3, ‘7677.228’][5, 1, 5, ‘−1355.549’][7, 1, 5, ‘−465.568’][2, 1, 2, ‘−207.105’][9, 1, 3, ‘−13088.411’][4, 1, 4, ‘28.276’][2, 1, 1, ‘−31.254’][1, 1, 1, ‘−30.302’]
TBI_100[5, 1, 1, ‘−888.900’][5, 1, 1, ‘5978.417’][2, 1, 10, ‘2357.758’][6, 1, 9, ‘1231.232’][3, 1, 10, ‘35412.892’][2, 1, 9, ‘2860.168’][4, 1, 10, ‘1285.253’][6, 1, 9, ‘671.428’][3, 1, 9, ‘4643.162’][4, 1, 6, ‘−204.319’][3, 1, 1, ‘−229.001’][1, 1, 2, ‘−229.658’]
TBI_101[3, 1, 1, ‘887.794’][8, 1, 6, ‘32.000’][2, 1, 2, ‘257.635’][1, 1, 1, ‘146.425’][1, 1, 2, ‘3901.882’][1, 1, 3, ‘135.282’][1, 1, 6, ‘60.055’][1, 1, 3, ‘51.528’][7, 1, 10, ‘731.290’][1, 1, 2, ‘55.751’][1, 1, 1, ‘3.045’][1, 1, 1, ‘−9.219’]
TBI_102[4, 1, 2, ‘2788.047’][1, 1, 1, ‘1168.088’][1, 1, 1, ‘390.724’][1, 1, 2, ‘219.561’][1, 1, 6, ‘10221.411’][6, 1, 2, ‘409.388’][1, 1, 1, ‘211.116’][2, 1, 1, ‘124.576’][3, 1, 5, ‘4170.125’][7, 1, 1, ‘166.367’][1, 1, 3, ‘1.027’][1, 1, 1, ‘−14.126’]
TBI_103[8, 1, 2, ‘2542.697’][8, 1, 8, ‘8422.112’][9, 1, 3, ‘2832.935’][4, 1, 2, ‘1384.877’][10, 1, 1, ‘59606.024’][1, 1, 9, ‘4707.190’][7, 1, 5, ‘1614.544’][3, 1, 1, ‘791.598’][10, 1, 1, ‘27946.372’][6, 1, 2, ‘55.531’][2, 1, 1, ‘−193.827’][1, 1, 1, ‘−193.076’]
TBI_104[4, 1, 2, ‘3715.331’][7, 1, 10, ‘1789.902’][3, 1, 3, ‘601.941’][1, 1, 1, ‘337.912’][1, 1, 4, ‘16471.188’][1, 1, 1, ‘486.303’][1, 1, 2, ‘80.663’][2, 1, 2, ‘22.752’][9, 1, 1, ‘7244.001’][1, 1, 2, ‘242.016’][1, 1, 2, ‘1.158’][1, 1, 1, ‘−14.056’]
TBI_105[6, 1, 1, ‘2386.668’][1, 1, 2, ‘1976.162’][3, 1, 3, ‘770.934’][1, 1, 1, ‘374.930’][1, 1, 8, ‘13743.443’][1, 1, 2, ‘737.405’][1, 1, 2, ‘359.042’][2, 1, 3, ‘184.929’][3, 1, 2, ‘14.000’][1, 1, 1, ‘204.868’][1, 1, 1, ‘−3.069’][5, 1, 2, ‘−31.658’]
TBI_106[7, 1, 1, ‘5618.687’][3, 1, 5, ‘1840.146’][9, 1, 2, ‘696.184’][3, 1, 5, ‘330.181’][1, 1, 9, ‘16364.647’][8, 1, 9, ‘−964.441’][2, 1, 1, ‘−407.916’][3, 1, 1, ‘−209.424’][4, 1, 1, ‘−2092.997’][1, 1, 1, ‘458.617’][2, 1, 1, ‘30.024’][1, 1, 5, ‘−16.150’]
TBI_107[10, 1, 1, ‘6173.907’][5, 1, 6, ‘1661.255’][2, 1, 4, ‘574.528’][1, 1, 1, ‘318.744’][1, 1, 6, ‘14679.800’][5, 1, 1, ‘−602.737’][2, 1, 1, ‘−215.790’][1, 1, 1, ‘−105.277’][8, 1, 1, ‘−466.665’][1, 1, 1, ‘545.032’][1, 1, 1, ‘86.081’][1, 1, 1, ‘11.488’]
TBI_108[1, 1, 3, ‘2004.242’][1, 1, 1, ‘648.972’][1, 1, 1, ‘266.534’][1, 1, 3, ‘140.861’][2, 1, 8, ‘5369.098’][1, 1, 1, ‘−625.873’][3, 1, 3, ‘−153.625’][1, 1, 1, ‘−72.004’][1, 1, 1, ‘−5104.216’][2, 1, 1, ‘96.404’][1, 1, 1, ‘−25.264’][1, 1, 1, ‘−32.791’]
TBI_109[6, 1, 3, ‘276.721’][1, 1, 1, ‘335.184’][10, 1, 2, ‘107.985’][8, 1, 4, ‘45.989’][1, 1, 8, ‘771.134’][3, 1, 3, ‘14.186’][1, 1, 1, ‘22.349’][1, 1, 1, ‘13.994’][3, 1, 3, ‘−79.196’][1, 1, 6, ‘55.569’][1, 1, 1, ‘7.995’][6, 1, 1, ‘−5.137’]
TBI_110[6, 1, 6, ‘4470.392’][4, 1, 8, ‘2406.468’][8, 1, 9, ‘812.468’][5, 1, 5, ‘440.770’][1, 1, 7, ‘18946.739’][6, 1, 5, ‘369.640’][2, 1, 10, ‘94.481’][3, 1, 1, ‘59.186’][8, 1, 1, ‘917.587’][1, 1, 2, ‘367.743’][1, 1, 5, ‘−35.338’][3, 1, 4, ‘−65.701’]
TBI_111[5, 1, 1, ‘−884.091’][5, 1, 1, ‘3183.328’][1, 1, 1, ‘1111.862’][1, 1, 1, ‘574.672’][8, 1, 2, ‘16406.020’][5, 1, 1, ‘1905.199’][1, 1, 1, ‘702.719’][5, 1, 5, ‘359.829’][3, 1, 9, ‘6931.459’][1, 1, 1, ‘−224.253’][1, 1, 1, ‘−191.500’][1, 1, 1, ‘−121.690’]
TBI_112[5, 1, 1, ‘1860.804’][2, 1, 7, ‘1897.303’][5, 1, 3, ‘838.261’][2, 1, 6, ‘485.937’][9, 1, 6, ‘8815.433’][9, 1, 10, ‘−324.208’][4, 1, 1, ‘81.606’][1, 1, 2, ‘77.601’][5, 1, 7, ‘−9640.931’][3, 1, 1, ‘58.025’][1, 1, 2, ‘−87.276’][1, 1, 3, ‘−78.763’]

Appendix E. Residuals, ACF, and PACF Plots of Residuals and Analysis

This appendix contains the figures and tables for the evaluation of the median optimal ARIMA models. Included are comparative ACF/PACF plots of the residuals (original vs. post-ARIMA) for a single patient’s ICP and AMP data at both minute-by-minute and hour-by-hour resolutions. Additionally, the variance of the overall data, the residual variance, and the count of significant spikes are provided both for an individual patient and as a summary of the entire population to demonstrate effective data modeling.
ACF, autocorrelative function; AMP, pulse amplitude of ICP; ARIMA, auto-regressive integrated moving average; ICP, intracranial pressure; PACF, partial ACF; RAP, compensatory reserve index.
Figure A1. ACF and PACF plots for ICP at minute-by-minute resolution for an individual. (a) RAP pre-ARIMA plots, (b) RAP post-ARIMA (5, 1, 1) plots.
Figure A1. ACF and PACF plots for ICP at minute-by-minute resolution for an individual. (a) RAP pre-ARIMA plots, (b) RAP post-ARIMA (5, 1, 1) plots.
Sensors 25 00586 g0a1
The figure corresponds to the ACF and PACF plots of residuals of the ICP signal (a) before and (b) after ARIMA (5, 1, 1), demonstrating that the model moderately accounts for the ICP structure.
Figure A2. ACF and PACF plots for ICP at different resolutions for an individual. (a) At 10-min-by-10-min resolution with ARIMA (2, 1, 2), (b) at 30-min-by-30-min resolution with ARIMA (2, 1, 2), (c) at hour-by-hour resolution with ARIMA (2, 1, 2).
Figure A2. ACF and PACF plots for ICP at different resolutions for an individual. (a) At 10-min-by-10-min resolution with ARIMA (2, 1, 2), (b) at 30-min-by-30-min resolution with ARIMA (2, 1, 2), (c) at hour-by-hour resolution with ARIMA (2, 1, 2).
Sensors 25 00586 g0a2
The figure documents the ACF and PACF of the residuals of the ICP-mapped ARIMA structure in the (a) 10-min-by-10-min, (b) 30-min-by-30-min, and (c) hour-by-hour relationships.
Figure A3. ACF and PACF plots for AMP at minute-by-minute resolution for an individual. (a) AMP pre-ARIMA plots, (b) AMP post-ARIMA (3, 1, 5) plots.
Figure A3. ACF and PACF plots for AMP at minute-by-minute resolution for an individual. (a) AMP pre-ARIMA plots, (b) AMP post-ARIMA (3, 1, 5) plots.
Sensors 25 00586 g0a3
The figure corresponds to the ACF and PACF plots of residuals of the AMP signal (a) before and (b) after ARIMA (3, 1, 5), demonstrating that the model moderately accounts for the AMP structure.
Figure A4. ACF and PACF plots for AMP at different resolutions for an individual. (a) At 10-min-by-10-min resolution with ARIMA (2, 1, 3), (b) at 30-min-by-30-min resolution with ARIMA (2, 1, 2), (c) at hour-by-hour resolution with ARIMA (1, 1, 1).
Figure A4. ACF and PACF plots for AMP at different resolutions for an individual. (a) At 10-min-by-10-min resolution with ARIMA (2, 1, 3), (b) at 30-min-by-30-min resolution with ARIMA (2, 1, 2), (c) at hour-by-hour resolution with ARIMA (1, 1, 1).
Sensors 25 00586 g0a4
The figure documents the ACF and PACF of the residuals of the AMP-mapped ARIMA structure in the (a) 10-min-by-10-min, (b) 30-min-by-30-min, and (c) hour-by-hour relationships.
Figure A5. ACF/PACF plots for TBI_071 patient at minute-by-minute resolution.
Figure A5. ACF/PACF plots for TBI_071 patient at minute-by-minute resolution.
Sensors 25 00586 g0a5
This figure documents the ACF and PACF of the residuals of RAP-mapped AMIRA structure at the minute-by-minute resolution for a particular patient.
Table A25. Summary of data variance, residual variance, and significant spike counts (single patient at minute-by-minute resolution).
Table A25. Summary of data variance, residual variance, and significant spike counts (single patient at minute-by-minute resolution).
Var_DataVar_Model_ResACF_Org_SpikesPACF_Org_SpikesACF_Model_SpikesPACF_Model_Spikes
0.0943940.0672137211
Table A26. Summary of data variance, residual variance, and significant spike counts (single patient at hour-by-hour resolution).
Table A26. Summary of data variance, residual variance, and significant spike counts (single patient at hour-by-hour resolution).
Var_DataVar_Model_ResACF_Org_SpikesPACF_Org_SpikesACF_Model_SpikesPACF_Model_Spikes
0.0225910.0266225400
Table A27. Summary of data variance, residual variance, and significant spike counts (all patients at minute-by-minute resolution for ICP).
Table A27. Summary of data variance, residual variance, and significant spike counts (all patients at minute-by-minute resolution for ICP).
PatientVar_DataVar_Model_ResACF_Org_SpikesPACF_Org_SpikesACF_Model_SpikesPACF_Model_Spikes
TBI_00125.483644363.63261979401066
TBI_00225.992399183.778211379401034
TBI_0035.8329117420.35629063140633
TBI_0041.547498462.0017493176701
TBI_00722.172847363.7138649540200
TBI_00822.458234010.69789721640322
TBI_00923.042430950.596444037401277
TBI_01029.647713270.891392079401187
TBI_01122.052129944.220736902402544
TBI_0128.0133602391.3864565740955
TBI_01311.926490021.01126543240500
TBI_014206.32755950.61097405240311
TBI_01529.385957651.48767945540836
TBI_01628.678734623.962485758401123
TBI_0174.8842879911.24757018440955
TBI_01830.269437710.71036258240922
TBI_01964.846114853.392462708401347
TBI_02034.664441420.812315036401087
TBI_02112.999586490.304253507408810
TBI_02241.267229950.78598675401644
TBI_0238.393109310.9603001940600
TBI_0249.9377368880.73705009840600
TBI_0255.61315760.13118960540511
TBI_02613.60380473.197814484401633
TBI_027218.818073511.7856468233200
TBI_02844.693773873.839957714409813
TBI_029153.60650052.604778911401155
TBI_03017.700421961.86478449440511
TBI_031147.89903943.600599954191401
TBI_032123.151424.647488278401145
TBI_0336.8124393811.48032215540400
TBI_0345.1331679010.41000454540654
TBI_03623.654785261.11201944940211618
TBI_03726.113141894.098089686401533
TBI_03830.290764852.5778530744013712
TBI_03913.496968242.09930280440711
TBI_04018.7450571.784692725401700
TBI_04111.310476711.123032534401477
TBI_04224.220238354.49929491740944
TBI_0432.5868221030.35153109401122
TBI_04435.556684951.53342116440411
TBI_04518.57119651.33776980340855
TBI_04647.476989931.47759629140600
TBI_04725.412745562.65409357740934
TBI_04841.203989572.26264203540613
TBI_0496.1266548450.713296488401343
TBI_0507.7853411942.31140302737544
TBI_051139.86297411.42615963640311
TBI_05233.717463771.11046677340900
TBI_05310.763796790.356262064401133
TBI_0547.0844999180.97655449840834
TBI_05510.906342531.650016163401345
TBI_0560.8040435010.8913927123300
TBI_05748.876813932.8263661401622
TBI_05816.030084980.80914069340933
TBI_05910.04639260.44625830340500
TBI_06021.931517462.350809439400
TBI_0611.5749573710.46011327240700
TBI_06221.712154140.90410603240945
TBI_0637.3335395521.204839187401033
TBI_0648.2217759232.506947257401023
TBI_06514.545042381.197050539401134
TBI_0668.0346272780.383159191401356
TBI_0675.0704257241.81756531140622
TBI_0686.8643966740.848308599401400
TBI_06935.00707125.026144838402200
TBI_07048.967459921.08184642740200
TBI_07115.383507681.259515207401243
TBI_07247.616960741.28582487640645
TBI_07311.843412510.814264356401333
TBI_07410.068019511.19031072340912
TBI_07537.674644274.41909373140522
TBI_07625.360529453.646337932402164
TBI_07721.079248793.76164841240732
TBI_07810.016775731.16052202140611
TBI_07913.386329121.168007936402122
TBI_08012.187239441.092091969401511
TBI_08125.365492133.134550556401667
TBI_08218.585406240.86697196540500
TBI_0836.1911204240.52282662140800
TBI_0842.6334605180.08448181540811
TBI_08521.40996272.655752348401744
TBI_08618.146792151.561314381401222
TBI_08717.386886370.27515677240800
TBI_08813.499173362.496028662401154
TBI_08911.296415132.409699601401700
TBI_09033.018019392.613315144401233
TBI_09153.727782433.25310356140181110
TBI_09231.48904523.335741747401244
TBI_09344.339117113.77693402401435
TBI_0945.3499896721.557513561401211
TBI_09517.534140622.005922702401166
TBI_0964.9493546825.2120090082201
TBI_0973.6142319290.188247537401002
TBI_0985.9247710080.36367599840800
TBI_0992.4752073070.268928986401711
TBI_10089.169024011.66188209840854
TBI_10187.417893321.41843085440500
TBI_10214.09380891.427338644401443
TBI_10345.753614483.81985242940944
TBI_10420.59612582.816142324401301
TBI_10550.476201471.197399697401045
TBI_1064.8793383290.657268511401822
TBI_10740.249378340.962644128401833
TBI_1082.3193604830.353460811401001
TBI_1098.9470883381.60465640616615
TBI_1108.7272499531.257566832401600
TBI_11162.133255465.09663524340633
TBI_11273.746132640.35151729840523
Table A28. Summary of data variance, residual variance, and significant spike counts (all patients at minute-by-minute resolution for AMP).
Table A28. Summary of data variance, residual variance, and significant spike counts (all patients at minute-by-minute resolution for AMP).
PatientVar_DataVar_Model_ResACF_Org_SpikesPACF_Org_SpikesACF_Model_SpikesPACF_Model_Spikes
TBI_0011.3433401320.328208076401634
TBI_0022.2932702280.27756193840422
TBI_0030.0339509710.0034604401422
TBI_0040.0981237410.1209670390011
TBI_0070.4215774780.06519003840833
TBI_0080.0438922220.005038925401111
TBI_0090.9969061650.032187021401566
TBI_0106.3470411830.12921377640623
TBI_0111.3122775960.213840339401533
TBI_0120.4621328630.08030517340700
TBI_0131.1570811690.11891968740900
TBI_0146.2356683950.03947374540822
TBI_0150.3737399710.0369408854016714
TBI_0160.5355297510.173978637401236
TBI_0170.1296814750.054670374016810
TBI_0180.2446796650.031328531401046
TBI_0190.535356020.04316202940922
TBI_0200.4188608090.012523453401066
TBI_0210.3600690510.00937545740833
TBI_0220.0878126230.00649149401743
TBI_0230.2980029130.01504265340823
TBI_0240.3758283880.02271395340944
TBI_0250.0141436720.00097221140600
TBI_0260.8701263110.337256464402044
TBI_02711.922124720.57178938134200
TBI_0280.4284917240.07219932940544
TBI_0299.2222760760.702653347401233
TBI_0300.6783174630.0917089940931
TBI_0313.8790659590.13147537722936
TBI_0322.6937387310.15668422340934
TBI_0330.0312370550.01347908640955
TBI_0340.0135055490.000891985401066
TBI_0360.4585454780.03313824140332019
TBI_0370.7267835890.112287341401677
TBI_0381.4154676620.158541956401023
TBI_0390.7541878290.12995448340411
TBI_0402.1999891720.060258868401100
TBI_0410.3125475270.025969651401566
TBI_0420.3877842180.176371158401244
TBI_0430.0090888990.002822772401233
TBI_0441.4063729390.04841596540500
TBI_0450.3579538080.02898496640977
TBI_0462.8314914880.04605239140500
TBI_0470.6033171690.0551637744016810
TBI_0480.2294170960.02856262940633
TBI_0490.0925350610.012429916401655
TBI_0500.1313449920.048349435401055
TBI_0510.2722161090.00525389140833
TBI_0520.1780864790.04151079540900
TBI_0530.177037710.0071357144013911
TBI_0540.1202381290.0133125140511
TBI_0550.044589490.00443932540845
TBI_0560.0143167290.0122819753200
TBI_0573.5693925380.19745752440221011
TBI_0580.4409422550.02997124440933
TBI_0590.064313190.032033161401613
TBI_0600.9482921820.1098295540500
TBI_0610.0076345160.003148153401311
TBI_0620.1555636780.01188694140844
TBI_0630.3075718650.0346131440800
TBI_0640.180614620.02080313340800
TBI_0650.7534409610.057827397401476
TBI_0660.0735132130.005912603401778
TBI_0670.9790825460.08621937340311
TBI_0680.6414639390.013394464401311
TBI_0691.3183293460.101846174402311
TBI_0700.1850220460.0272736240401
TBI_0712.5306680950.067842403401033
TBI_0726.7105033870.2142374474014810
TBI_0730.4846361390.011947037401277
TBI_0740.2770966850.095297557401877
TBI_0751.4861255570.11657141440400
TBI_0760.6454180440.148216566402322
TBI_0770.6294240920.13324613740911
TBI_0780.0192091860.0022126240811
TBI_0790.4176763250.057531593401433
TBI_0800.0447918970.017220055402111
TBI_0811.1838047190.082886153401588
TBI_0820.1039968320.01842447840700
TBI_0830.043951370.013358484401622
TBI_0840.0168571470.007414626401711
TBI_0850.614982220.052421746401799
TBI_0860.1906032890.026546363401055
TBI_0870.3735479520.010920271401521
TBI_0880.4271418360.068219118401133
TBI_0890.1988991720.019610697401223
TBI_0901.3843967960.07785189940141012
TBI_0913.3287477570.1304822184016109
TBI_0921.8235829580.121793733401121
TBI_0930.6308763970.199425558402022
TBI_0940.2803040830.14865457440600
TBI_0950.3591901230.043814102401355
TBI_0960.1402104390.2520064223400
TBI_0970.0639931430.00378146640911
TBI_0980.0342604070.010855786401933
TBI_0990.0227109510.004343759401721
TBI_1004.7571249980.09389492401367
TBI_1010.443988930.111418776401266
TBI_1023.3419086170.229569975401433
TBI_1034.6649958350.417131024401676
TBI_1040.5825086470.31994129401723
TBI_1052.7264135420.05636490640933
TBI_1060.0771236130.042809749402711
TBI_1070.0795939970.054014426401777
TBI_1080.0409242080.01081616740800
TBI_1090.0789215040.05230956326511
TBI_1100.2757667390.069077438401411
TBI_1117.7228363780.38544200940723
TBI_1120.2743074660.008567303401344
Table A29. Summary of data variance, residual variance, and significant spike counts (all patients at minute-by-minute resolution for RAP).
Table A29. Summary of data variance, residual variance, and significant spike counts (all patients at minute-by-minute resolution for RAP).
PatientVar_DataVar_Model_ResACF_Org_SpikesPACF_Org_SpikesACF_Model_SpikesPACF_Model_Spikes
TBI_0010.14125150.070159938401766
TBI_0020.1294687860.07097308222645
TBI_0030.3037367810.09953459240822
TBI_0040.0810889630.0818025221100
TBI_0070.2203945640.10445437425434
TBI_0080.2432476760.13198356211422
TBI_0090.2657585080.128971031401532
TBI_0100.0655670750.0411791028400
TBI_0110.1561226640.0759086954018109
TBI_0120.1371850190.06219110221421
TBI_0130.0383802340.0207698346500
TBI_0140.2269883440.09721675320677
TBI_0150.2490628880.11431537540977
TBI_0160.2454327820.103552744401033
TBI_0170.2701574740.14131043133112
TBI_0180.4333222420.12296064940813
TBI_0190.2708024340.097354065401123
TBI_0200.1788454390.06900749402576
TBI_0210.15927270.068723601401865
TBI_0220.2417270850.108595488401577
TBI_0230.1995748220.08720553835800
TBI_0240.1506514240.07160167340833
TBI_0250.3604653750.16001110513667
TBI_0260.2486705420.12817721840834
TBI_0270.1988750020.08035539419722
TBI_0280.2673356130.12446904240955
TBI_0290.2284878050.129658932401422
TBI_0300.1689896390.07283269523123
TBI_0310.5708322860.12178538935624
TBI_0320.2236978030.11952848225422
TBI_0330.3571546830.16902939220433
TBI_0340.2999546730.14608355540500
TBI_0360.1390183840.06539022240933
TBI_0370.2015421260.081334675401853
TBI_0380.1598962250.069844247401200
TBI_0390.2158997360.09151222234723
TBI_0400.1608255250.07237232340945
TBI_0410.1800180020.08119978439645
TBI_0420.2813918180.13291046240923
TBI_0430.2922978390.14662936340855
TBI_0440.2015569020.09945812122612
TBI_0450.1632991250.079140004401056
TBI_0460.0878900070.04508537410333
TBI_0470.2943782480.14143738336411
TBI_0480.3295377190.15016729337511
TBI_0490.3542162390.168793758401465
TBI_0500.2374488310.12789375712623
TBI_0510.387894640.18509587525543
TBI_0520.4518012690.13745208940611
TBI_0530.299488990.097003591401434
TBI_0540.0943935310.06721253610322
TBI_0550.3315693960.144918929401145
TBI_0560.4152210040.2889367627713
TBI_0570.121078620.060243334402098
TBI_0580.2692060650.119063577401988
TBI_0590.2396441620.11925750240300
TBI_0600.1832227240.10619303528300
TBI_0610.2631705050.1254684932533
TBI_0620.3739682920.15799504616511
TBI_0630.1892570620.09856233427422
TBI_0640.4168735580.18996809236423
TBI_0650.1778954340.08592920329533
TBI_0660.227583530.106378819401487
TBI_0670.1610760460.08555042612433
TBI_0680.319343340.13831777240833
TBI_0690.1472418980.072484398381022
TBI_0700.3642003560.15631592517300
TBI_0710.12877530.05887803234644
TBI_0720.2505638260.10621716638423
TBI_0730.2119123930.097517151401455
TBI_0740.2353831850.11265190540822
TBI_0750.2512324150.10523339140834
TBI_0760.1503199960.07557991401023
TBI_0770.2027431690.09969236640822
TBI_0780.3504871870.1819635174300
TBI_0790.1682533140.06970085935944
TBI_0800.3152162630.168371540844
TBI_0810.1469786590.057566577401155
TBI_0820.2632334610.1298711114633
TBI_0830.3587159990.14785269529967
TBI_0840.3151270650.141740705301165
TBI_0850.1341279510.07083041639633
TBI_0860.1968439260.08764298401856
TBI_0870.180855090.081993391401564
TBI_0880.0847751080.043740211351267
TBI_0890.2833359670.123453535401822
TBI_0900.2229565460.076929373401733
TBI_0910.0901122540.039253186402233
TBI_0920.2035955450.084275289401844
TBI_0930.1909815870.085474574401266
TBI_0940.3064907510.16443445118322
TBI_0950.1441132110.06667547640511
TBI_0960.3018595760.1581551059602
TBI_0970.2315258380.10649798840811
TBI_0980.2770386290.131407275391255
TBI_0990.2593100220.14108561438822
TBI_1000.1201833350.05448055402277
TBI_1010.2563118340.11912174840823
TBI_1020.2892432850.137082761401522
TBI_1030.1541820220.070261691401587
TBI_1040.2972321260.140985497401400
TBI_1050.2888001640.10316541401510
TBI_1060.2847720040.13601980640610
TBI_1070.4255815490.186041656401478
TBI_1080.2053627020.11339443836400
TBI_1090.3753305450.2172004518459
TBI_1100.2427886230.12007381640644
TBI_1110.1082036240.04619709327844
TBI_1120.1764141560.08501834140711
Table A30. Median of the data variance, residual variance, and significant spike counts for total population at min-by-min resolution.
Table A30. Median of the data variance, residual variance, and significant spike counts for total population at min-by-min resolution.
ParametersVar_DataVar_Model_ResACF_Org_SpikesPACF_Org_SpikesACF_Model_SpikesPACF_Model_Spikes
ICP18.571201.4184340923
AMP0.417680.04842401133
RAP0.231530.1052340833
Table A31. Mean of the data variance, residual variance, and significant spike counts for total population at min-by-min resolution.
Table A31. Mean of the data variance, residual variance, and significant spike counts for total population at min-by-min resolution.
ParametersVar_DataVar_Model_ResACF_Org_SpikesPACF_Org_SpikesACF_Model_SpikesPACF_Model_Spikes
ICP29.787382.0006938.4862410.055052.724773.07339
AMP1.153580.0889138.6055011.568813.357803.63303
RAP0.236210.1088232.4495493.165143.34862
Table A32. Median of residuals at different resolutions.
Table A32. Median of residuals at different resolutions.
ParameterMinute-by-Minute10-min-by-10-min30-min-by-30-minHour-by-Hour
ICP0.179410.286460.373970.41906
AMP0.135490.217100.198700.19970
RAP0.125640.180850.140780.11851

Appendix F. A Comparative Analysis Between Clean and Artifact Data Using Optimal ARIMA

This appendix presents the optimal ARIMA models for artifact segments for each patient at both minute-by-minute and 10 min intervals, selected based on the lowest AIC value. Each cell displays four values—the p-, d-, and q-orders, along with the model’s AIC score. m refers to minute. Comparative tables and figures between clean and artifact profiles are also provided, showing median and mean values of the optimal ARIMA model orders, as well as scatterplots of these orders.
AIC, Akaike information criterion; AMP, pulse amplitude of ICP; ARIMA, auto-regressive integrated moving average; ICP, intracranial pressure; p-, d-, and q-orders, three components of ARIMA model, defining autoregression, integrated, and a moving average part, respectively; RAP, compensatory reserve index.
Table A33. Optimal ARIMA models of artifact segments.
Table A33. Optimal ARIMA models of artifact segments.
PatientICP m by mICP 10 m by 10 mAMP m by mAMP 10 m by 10 mRAP m by mRAP 10 m by 10 m
TBI_001[1, 1, 1, ‘216.851’][6, 1, 1, ‘4255.733’][1, 1, 6, ‘911.386’][6, 1, 1, ‘1332.552’][1, 1, 6, ‘59.114’][6, 1, 5, ‘−192.534’]
TBI_002[1, 1, 1, ‘195.969’][3, 1, 1, ‘798.246’][4, 1, 4, ‘20.000’][1, 1, 2, ‘390.750’][2, 1, 9, ‘366.023’][2, 1, 1, ‘−52.852’]
TBI_003[3, 1, 3, ‘151.597’][4, 1, 3, ‘609.108’][1, 1, 1, ‘654.294’][2, 1, 2, ‘−613.493’][1, 1, 1, ‘341.556’][3, 1, 4, ‘102.301’]
TBI_004[1, 1, 1, ‘380.408’][8, 1, 5, ‘19.483’][1, 1, 2, ‘1958.890’][10, 1, 1, ‘−8.337’][1, 1, 9, ‘−184.189’][1, 1, 1, ‘7.550’]
TBI_007[1, 1, 1, ‘260.029’][1, 1, 1, ‘341.530’][1, 1, 5, ‘1457.070’][1, 1, 1, ‘−42.308’][10, 1, 1, ‘804.155’][1, 1, 1, ‘29.447’]
TBI_008[2, 1, 4, ‘1253.486’][6, 1, 7, ‘640.823’][5, 1, 8, ‘4040.300’][1, 1, 5, ‘−234.704’][1, 1, 3, ‘−1014.547’][1, 1, 1, ‘133.499’]
TBI_009[1, 1, 5, ‘1390.931’][3, 1, 1, ‘2728.697’][8, 1, 8, ‘4457.610’][2, 1, 5, ‘−198.338’][4, 1, 10, ‘838.514’][2, 1, 3, ‘405.306’]
TBI_010[3, 1, 4, ‘302.078’][2, 1, 8, ‘829.657’][1, 1, 2, ‘1253.633’][8, 1, 2, ‘421.414’][3, 1, 2, ‘582.267’][2, 1, 4, ‘−123.974’]
TBI_011[4, 1, 1, ‘432.608’][4, 1, 1, ‘3969.556’][9, 1, 5, ‘1860.488’][5, 1, 5, ‘1322.034’][3, 1, 1, ‘1183.942’][9, 1, 1, ‘−66.064’]
TBI_012[5, 1, 3, ‘1207.493’][3, 1, 3, ‘932.354’][10, 1, 10, ‘5313.922’][3, 1, 4, ‘170.531’][9, 1, 10, ‘2074.735’][1, 1, 1, ‘34.510’]
TBI_013[6, 1, 6, ‘90.568’][1, 1, 1, ‘285.451’][9, 1, 5, ‘75.752’][1, 1, 1, ‘116.816’][3, 1, 1, ‘11.060’][1, 1, 1, ‘−111.659’]
TBI_014[6, 1, 1, ‘981.569’][6, 1, 2, ‘705.939’][10, 1, 10, ‘4907.600’][4, 1, 1, ‘170.705’][9, 1, 10, ‘319.266’][1, 1, 1, ‘149.620’]
TBI_015[1, 1, 4, ‘1744.311’][4, 1, 10, ‘3273.361’][8, 1, 3, ‘7903.675’][6, 1, 7, ‘887.067’][9, 1, 1, ‘1431.264’][4, 1, 1, ‘325.832’]
TBI_016[1, 1, 1, ‘221.447’][4, 1, 5, ‘577.298’][5, 1, 10, ‘821.869’][2, 1, 6, ‘92.695’][6, 1, 1, ‘564.081’][3, 1, 5, ‘35.309’]
TBI_017[1, 1, 1, ‘260.924’][1, 1, 2, ‘841.047’][4, 1, 1, ‘2207.630’][5, 1, 6, ‘−46.309’][8, 1, 4, ‘28.000’][5, 1, 5, ‘144.457’]
TBI_018[1, 1, 1, ‘162.220’][1, 1, 3, ‘433.669’][3, 1, 2, ‘1149.084’][1, 1, 2, ‘−13.491’][1, 1, 1, ‘404.283’][3, 1, 3, ‘89.550’]
TBI_019[5, 1, 2, ‘26.560’][2, 1, 6, ‘408.893’][1, 1, 1, ‘27.672’][4, 1, 3, ‘13.428’][2, 1, 1, ‘−74.780’][8, 1, 7, ‘18.908’]
TBI_020[1, 1, 3, ‘1008.423’][8, 1, 3, ‘4486.602’][5, 1, 3, ‘4279.900’][1, 1, 3, ‘5.157’][9, 1, 9, ‘1891.217’][3, 1, 1, ‘−23.169’]
TBI_021[3, 1, 1, ‘541.141’][1, 1, 2, ‘2075.738’][9, 1, 2, ‘1821.910’][1, 1, 3, ‘−1094.246’][1, 1, 2, ‘511.206’][1, 1, 2, ‘−105.751’]
TBI_022[1, 1, 4, ‘672.260’][3, 1, 4, ‘2732.960’][7, 1, 9, ‘2462.705’][6, 1, 3, ‘−1294.473’][3, 1, 6, ‘839.036’][1, 1, 2, ‘339.065’]
TBI_023[1, 1, 1, ‘251.917’][5, 1, 8, ‘2102.452’][1, 1, 4, ‘949.311’][2, 1, 2, ‘286.001’][2, 1, 5, ‘503.681’][1, 1, 1, ‘140.425’]
TBI_024[3, 1, 7, ‘630.735’][2, 1, 2, ‘1977.338’][10, 1, 8, ‘2840.440’][3, 1, 7, ‘213.528’][7, 1, 9, ‘770.870’][5, 1, 1, ‘46.978’]
TBI_025[1, 1, 4, ‘268.862’][5, 1, 7, ‘673.930’][6, 1, 3, ‘940.446’][2, 1, 1, ‘−187.712’][4, 1, 10, ‘161.285’][1, 1, 1, ‘182.025’]
TBI_026[4, 1, 1, ‘366.193’][3, 1, 1, ‘3079.708’][2, 1, 5, ‘1669.426’][4, 1, 7, ‘884.406’][6, 1, 7, ‘845.558’][2, 1, 1, ‘282.125’]
TBI_027[10, 1, 1, ‘4099.958’][6, 1, 6, ‘3432.804’][3, 1, 3, ‘18617.367’][8, 1, 9, ‘1810.299’][9, 1, 9, ‘6422.273’][3, 1, 2, ‘46.304’]
TBI_028[3, 1, 8, ‘1982.529’][6, 1, 5, ‘2481.023’][10, 1, 10, ‘1639.158’][1, 1, 1, ‘558.722’][10, 1, 7, ‘3723.586’][1, 1, 1, ‘228.778’]
TBI_029[2, 1, 4, ‘1868.183’][9, 1, 9, ‘3676.162’][7, 1, 5, ‘8724.573’][4, 1, 6, ‘1817.830’][7, 1, 7, ‘4065.914’][3, 1, 1, ‘323.412’]
TBI_030[1, 1, 1, ‘840.829’][2, 1, 5, ‘1440.883’][1, 1, 2, ‘4871.952’][2, 1, 1, ‘424.745’][2, 1, 4, ‘2217.295’][1, 1, 1, ‘125.002’]
TBI_031[6, 1, 1, ‘3583.410’][1, 1, 1, ‘116.934’][4, 1, 4, ‘11342.088’][9, 1, 1, ‘65.009’][9, 1, 10, ‘5250.503’][10, 1, 1, ‘12.878’]
TBI_032[3, 1, 2, ‘629.617’][4, 1, 6, ‘1243.360’][1, 1, 9, ‘3071.748’][8, 1, 6, ‘414.222’][3, 1, 1, ‘871.735’][1, 1, 1, ‘90.492’]
TBI_033[2, 1, 2, ‘99.774’][1, 1, 2, ‘556.279’][2, 1, 4, ‘420.894’][1, 1, 1, ‘−196.827’][2, 1, 1, ‘235.039’][1, 1, 1, ‘134.205’]
TBI_034[1, 1, 2, ‘880.048’][2, 1, 5, ‘608.336’][6, 1, 2, ‘3311.861’][2, 1, 1, ‘−560.840’][1, 1, 1, ‘1979.590’][1, 1, 1, ‘118.680’]
TBI_036[1, 1, 1, ‘603.420’][5, 1, 7, ‘6284.400’][2, 1, 2, ‘2793.023’][10, 1, 8, ‘2447.168’][6, 1, 10, ‘812.963’][1, 1, 1, ‘−40.093’]
TBI_037[6, 1, 1, ‘1049.940’][1, 1, 1, ‘3174.555’][1, 1, 9, ‘6439.643’][1, 1, 2, ‘692.762’][1, 1, 1, ‘2653.677’][6, 1, 7, ‘186.534’]
TBI_038[1, 1, 2, ‘327.503’][3, 1, 10, ‘3651.071’][1, 1, 1, ‘1631.377’][2, 1, 8, ‘1418.069’][2, 1, 5, ‘793.073’][1, 1, 1, ‘163.865’]
TBI_039[1, 1, 3, ‘248.396’][1, 1, 1, ‘1373.530’][3, 1, 10, ‘1548.009’][1, 1, 2, ‘461.798’][7, 1, 5, ‘699.469’][1, 1, 1, ‘147.763’]
TBI_040[2, 1, 2, ‘597.103’][1, 1, 3, ‘2388.786’][7, 1, 9, ‘2358.536’][3, 1, 4, ‘507.213’][6, 1, 9, ‘853.780’][1, 1, 2, ‘98.532’]
TBI_041[7, 1, 1, ‘624.256’][1, 1, 1, ‘2322.222’][1, 1, 1, ‘4350.928’][1, 1, 3, ‘218.837’][1, 1, 3, ‘1400.580’][3, 1, 1, ‘215.685’]
TBI_042[1, 1, 1, ‘132.493’][1, 1, 1, ‘1491.790’][1, 1, 1, ‘846.594’][4, 1, 1, ‘275.034’][4, 1, 7, ‘370.171’][2, 1, 3, ‘229.795’]
TBI_043[6, 1, 1, ‘3412.524’][1, 1, 1, ‘583.359’][9, 1, 10, ‘4393.327’][1, 1, 1, ‘−742.371’][8, 1, 8, ‘−10858.220’][1, 1, 2, ‘159.959’]
TBI_044[5, 1, 1, ‘899.183’][3, 1, 4, ‘712.394’][10, 1, 1, ‘8831.879’][2, 1, 1, ‘165.178’][6, 1, 1, ‘1444.800’][6, 1, 1, ‘70.514’]
TBI_045[2, 1, 6, ‘688.985’][4, 1, 3, ‘1595.632’][1, 1, 1, ‘3162.513’][2, 1, 1, ‘125.979’][1, 1, 4, ‘−2944.605’][2, 1, 5, ‘13.006’]
TBI_046[1, 1, 4, ‘57.821’][2, 1, 8, ‘745.024’][1, 1, 1, ‘125.272’][2, 1, 10, ‘340.444’][1, 1, 1, ‘−21.288’][2, 1, 2, ‘−91.210’]
TBI_047[1, 1, 4, ‘95.827’][1, 1, 1, ‘233.857’][1, 1, 1, ‘725.657’][1, 1, 2, ‘−20.787’][1, 1, 1, ‘249.664’][3, 1, 2, ‘43.998’]
TBI_048[2, 1, 1, ‘−9.027’][1, 1, 3, ‘1656.563’][10, 1, 1, ‘68.995’][2, 1, 1, ‘−669.049’][10, 1, 1, ‘33.094’][1, 1, 2, ‘436.151’]
TBI_049[1, 1, 2, ‘488.865’][2, 1, 4, ‘543.931’][1, 1, 1, ‘2721.889’][6, 1, 9, ‘7.473’][9, 1, 2, ‘875.675’][2, 1, 4, ‘75.450’]
TBI_050[1, 1, 1, ‘117.525’][2, 1, 2, ‘779.306’][1, 1, 1, ‘767.686’][2, 1, 1, ‘−239.027’][1, 1, 1, ‘210.167’][1, 1, 2, ‘129.049’]
TBI_051[1, 1, 5, ‘414.880’][1, 1, 1, ‘420.971’][1, 1, 4, ‘2888.338’][2, 1, 10, ‘−111.112’][4, 1, 1, ‘248.949’][1, 1, 1, ‘120.369’]
TBI_052[5, 1, 5, ‘136.822’][4, 1, 8, ‘1055.686’][1, 1, 2, ‘665.639’][8, 1, 10, ‘−414.364’][1, 1, 2, ‘291.463’][3, 1, 7, ‘171.868’]
TBI_053[2, 1, 3, ‘105.092’][4, 1, 3, ‘248.705’][1, 1, 1, ‘230.665’][2, 1, 2, ‘−69.739’][1, 1, 1, ‘−60.925’][2, 1, 3, ‘−34.805’]
TBI_054[1, 1, 1, ‘134.648’][1, 1, 1, ‘1387.897’][3, 1, 1, ‘−1697.984’][1, 1, 4, ‘−662.759’][1, 1, 2, ‘−1830.949’][2, 1, 1, ‘240.594’]
TBI_055[6, 1, 1, ‘495.105’][8, 1, 1, ‘26.408’][9, 1, 3, ‘28.000’][6, 1, 1, ‘−13.890’][5, 1, 8, ‘203.978’][9, 1, 1, ‘17.316’]
TBI_056[2, 1, 1, ‘327.771’][9, 1, 9, ‘7011.416’][1, 1, 2, ‘2266.753’][7, 1, 1, ‘2779.937’][1, 1, 8, ‘968.387’][5, 1, 1, ‘443.905’]
TBI_057[4, 1, 3, ‘2222.079’][1, 1, 1, ‘1432.209’][5, 1, 5, ‘10260.114’][2, 1, 2, ‘−44.341’][3, 1, 5, ‘3337.734’][1, 1, 1, ‘146.171’]
TBI_058[2, 1, 1, ‘322.791’][2, 1, 2, ‘383.868’][1, 1, 1, ‘2050.290’][1, 1, 1, ‘−221.804’][1, 1, 1, ‘599.655’][1, 1, 1, ‘73.161’]
TBI_059[3, 1, 1, ‘58.209’][1, 1, 2, ‘1363.277’][1, 1, 5, ‘189.682’][1, 1, 5, ‘471.852’][2, 1, 1, ‘87.081’][2, 1, 4, ‘35.108’]
TBI_060[2, 1, 1, ‘143.785’][3, 1, 2, ‘258.540’][2, 1, 5, ‘453.600’][1, 1, 7, ‘−451.396’][2, 1, 5, ‘204.925’][2, 1, 1, ‘84.490’]
TBI_061[4, 1, 3, ‘95.894’][1, 1, 1, ‘401.476’][3, 1, 2, ‘195.117’][3, 1, 7, ‘19.553’][1, 1, 1, ‘−149.068’][3, 1, 3, ‘88.883’]
TBI_062[4, 1, 2, ‘92.239’][1, 1, 1, ‘1489.315’][2, 1, 1, ‘−887.826’][1, 1, 2, ‘35.883’][4, 1, 1, ‘−721.733’][2, 1, 2, ‘40.785’]
TBI_063[4, 1, 1, ‘467.747’][1, 1, 1, ‘274.303’][5, 1, 10, ‘3628.414’][2, 1, 2, ‘−79.875’][1, 1, 1, ‘1415.880’][1, 1, 1, ‘76.839’]
TBI_064[1, 1, 1, ‘194.979’][1, 1, 2, ‘465.404’][5, 1, 4, ‘22.000’][1, 1, 1, ‘120.083’][1, 1, 1, ‘241.505’][1, 1, 1, ‘10.605’]
TBI_065[5, 1, 1, ‘239.342’][4, 1, 3, ‘1368.894’][1, 1, 1, ‘1666.025’][2, 1, 1, ‘−896.379’][1, 1, 1, ‘782.385’][1, 1, 1, ‘150.551’]
TBI_066[1, 1, 1, ‘240.558’][7, 1, 1, ‘385.927’][1, 1, 1, ‘1617.437’][2, 1, 10, ‘158.461’][1, 1, 1, ‘563.820’][1, 1, 1, ‘33.999’]
TBI_067[3, 1, 3, ‘645.248’][1, 1, 1, ‘1229.778’][1, 1, 1, ‘4416.943’][1, 1, 3, ‘−217.419’][1, 1, 2, ‘1180.296’][3, 1, 3, ‘296.879’]
TBI_068[1, 1, 4, ‘146.175’][3, 1, 4, ‘4544.290’][1, 1, 1, ‘906.955’][1, 1, 2, ‘1296.419’][1, 1, 1, ‘290.948’][10, 1, 1, ‘15.428’]
TBI_069[2, 1, 1, ‘605.122’][1, 1, 4, ‘126.313’][7, 1, 4, ‘4050.266’][1, 1, 1, ‘−26.652’][1, 1, 2, ‘1771.818’][2, 1, 1, ‘49.412’]
TBI_070[4, 1, 1, ‘73.125’][7, 1, 4, ‘6316.318’][1, 1, 1, ‘−93.274’][2, 1, 2, ‘2622.449’][2, 1, 1, ‘−71.552’][1, 1, 1, ‘−38.552’]
TBI_071[3, 1, 3, ‘304.884’][7, 1, 9, ‘36.000’][5, 1, 2, ‘1276.778’][6, 1, 9, ‘288.003’][4, 1, 1, ‘552.057’][3, 1, 1, ‘75.470’]
TBI_072[1, 1, 1, ‘155.511’][2, 1, 3, ‘5265.377’][4, 1, 2, ‘16.000’][3, 1, 5, ‘−1026.621’][1, 1, 2, ‘309.501’][1, 1, 1, ‘602.585’]
TBI_073[2, 1, 4, ‘307.419’][1, 1, 2, ‘2353.766’][10, 1, 5, ‘34.000’][6, 1, 10, ‘−38.469’][1, 1, 2, ‘755.731’][1, 1, 1, ‘72.476’]
TBI_074[3, 1, 3, ‘126.786’][8, 1, 10, ‘40.000’][1, 1, 1, ‘−50.894’][3, 1, 6, ‘244.269’][1, 1, 1, ‘−639.540’][3, 1, 3, ‘93.193’]
TBI_075[3, 1, 3, ‘323.676’][1, 1, 2, ‘3795.065’][1, 1, 5, ‘2518.804’][6, 1, 5, ‘668.983’][5, 1, 1, ‘401.281’][3, 1, 1, ‘37.733’]
TBI_076[2, 1, 2, ‘153.266’][1, 1, 1, ‘2098.357’][1, 1, 3, ‘1149.362’][3, 1, 3, ‘643.225’][1, 1, 3, ‘347.456’][3, 1, 1, ‘119.313’]
TBI_077[2, 1, 6, ‘235.293’][1, 1, 1, ‘561.375’][1, 1, 1, ‘1869.856’][3, 1, 9, ‘−312.053’][1, 1, 1, ‘433.423’][1, 1, 1, ‘131.781’]
TBI_078[10, 1, 8, ‘40.000’][1, 1, 1, ‘989.121’][5, 1, 4, ‘22.000’][1, 1, 1, ‘140.132’][1, 1, 10, ‘−4685.873’][4, 1, 1, ‘37.465’]
TBI_079[4, 1, 6, ‘200.652’][3, 1, 1, ‘2914.104’][4, 1, 1, ‘630.640’][1, 1, 1, ‘−1450.861’][5, 1, 5, ‘−53.220’][1, 1, 2, ‘532.785’]
TBI_080[2, 1, 2, ‘526.633’][8, 1, 8, ‘5232.541’][9, 1, 7, ‘1413.642’][3, 1, 4, ‘1931.642’][2, 1, 4, ‘−95.125’][1, 1, 1, ‘49.576’]
TBI_081[1, 1, 1, ‘410.170’][2, 1, 2, ‘324.380’][1, 1, 2, ‘1671.767’][1, 1, 3, ‘−106.536’][6, 1, 1, ‘326.753’][1, 1, 1, ‘76.542’]
TBI_082[1, 1, 1, ‘142.962’][4, 1, 4, ‘615.931’][8, 1, 4, ‘701.148’][1, 1, 1, ‘−480.234’][1, 1, 7, ‘16.887’][1, 1, 6, ‘182.994’]
TBI_083[4, 1, 2, ‘192.671’][1, 1, 1, ‘254.656’][3, 1, 3, ‘519.270’][1, 1, 1, ‘−724.082’][1, 1, 1, ‘−70.222’][1, 1, 1, ‘227.432’]
TBI_084[7, 1, 2, ‘176.973’][9, 1, 8, ‘3805.534’][1, 1, 1, ‘1396.861’][8, 1, 7, ‘282.638’][1, 1, 1, ‘675.169’][1, 1, 1, ‘−56.330’]
TBI_085[4, 1, 5, ‘164.428’][4, 1, 9, ‘4333.346’][1, 1, 1, ‘794.102’][4, 1, 1, ‘43.771’][5, 1, 1, ‘141.663’][1, 1, 2, ‘148.433’]
TBI_086[1, 1, 3, ‘653.506’][1, 1, 2, ‘2362.099’][1, 1, 1, ‘2196.813’][4, 1, 2, ‘−1591.208’][1, 1, 1, ‘−8.758’][1, 1, 1, ‘99.391’]
TBI_087[3, 1, 1, ‘254.955’][3, 1, 4, ‘5733.186’][9, 1, 2, ‘350.266’][7, 1, 1, ‘1185.601’][9, 1, 10, ‘−338.154’][1, 1, 1, ‘−719.332’]
TBI_088[2, 1, 1, ‘313.831’][1, 1, 2, ‘2767.672’][3, 1, 4, ‘2097.287’][1, 1, 1, ‘−898.413’][1, 1, 1, ‘799.464’][1, 1, 1, ‘361.620’]
TBI_089[5, 1, 5, ‘374.758’][2, 1, 7, ‘2391.440’][2, 1, 2, ‘3375.603’][7, 1, 3, ‘605.383’][1, 1, 3, ‘1499.648’][1, 1, 1, ‘212.776’]
TBI_090[2, 1, 9, ‘627.030’][7, 1, 2, ‘6128.983’][6, 1, 9, ‘4000.068’][5, 1, 7, ‘2342.235’][1, 1, 7, ‘980.755’][6, 1, 8, ‘−668.544’]
TBI_091[1, 1, 4, ‘492.351’][1, 1, 5, ‘3760.560’][1, 1, 1, ‘4113.294’][3, 1, 4, ‘1543.450’][2, 1, 9, ‘2720.688’][7, 1, 2, ‘261.090’]
TBI_092[3, 1, 1, ‘377.535’][1, 1, 2, ‘5118.541’][2, 1, 1, ‘2346.761’][3, 1, 1, ‘1003.610’][1, 1, 1, ‘802.367’][1, 1, 2, ‘279.230’]
TBI_093[1, 1, 1, ‘440.220’][6, 1, 6, ‘394.269’][1, 1, 1, ‘2516.182’][1, 1, 1, ‘54.721’][2, 1, 1, ‘1282.904’][1, 1, 1, ‘127.756’]
TBI_094[4, 1, 2, ‘244.423’][1, 1, 1, ‘2364.346’][1, 1, 5, ‘692.869’][1, 1, 3, ‘126.146’][4, 1, 3, ‘418.360’][4, 1, 9, ‘9.800’]
TBI_095[1, 1, 1, ‘222.588’][1, 1, 1, ‘96.413’][10, 1, 8, ‘40.000’][1, 1, 2, ‘34.204’][2, 1, 3, ‘317.848’][1, 1, 4, ‘4.547’]
TBI_096[1, 1, 4, ‘1859.860’][2, 1, 7, ‘539.291’][1, 1, 6, ‘6557.346’][3, 1, 3, ‘−861.808’][1, 1, 3, ‘3169.689’][2, 1, 1, ‘164.963’]
TBI_097[4, 1, 3, ‘197.839’][1, 1, 2, ‘1453.918’][4, 1, 2, ‘768.896’][9, 1, 6, ‘−722.735’][1, 1, 1, ‘545.407’][3, 1, 1, ‘291.945’]
TBI_098[1, 1, 4, ‘341.200’][4, 1, 6, ‘1044.266’][1, 1, 1, ‘2084.600’][5, 1, 5, ‘−1355.549’][6, 1, 6, ‘642.491’][4, 1, 4, ‘28.276’]
TBI_099[4, 1, 4, ‘296.096’][5, 1, 1, ‘5978.417’][1, 1, 1, ‘2039.579’][2, 1, 9, ‘2860.168’][1, 1, 2, ‘960.570’][4, 1, 6, ‘−204.319’]
TBI_100[6, 1, 1, ‘1032.526’][8, 1, 6, ‘32.000’][8, 1, 8, ‘4341.087’][1, 1, 3, ‘135.282’][7, 1, 3, ‘1694.936’][1, 1, 2, ‘55.751’]
TBI_101[5, 1, 1, ‘833.134’][1, 1, 1, ‘1168.088’][1, 1, 2, ‘5578.883’][6, 1, 2, ‘409.388’][1, 1, 3, ‘1230.939’][7, 1, 1, ‘166.367’]
TBI_102[9, 1, 1, ‘21.916’][8, 1, 8, ‘8422.112’][2, 1, 2, ‘118.470’][1, 1, 9, ‘4707.190’][2, 1, 1, ‘106.422’][6, 1, 2, ‘55.531’]
TBI_103[9, 1, 10, ‘42.000’][7, 1, 10, ‘1789.902’][1, 1, 1, ‘1871.172’][1, 1, 1, ‘486.303’][3, 1, 1, ‘953.341’][1, 1, 2, ‘242.016’]
TBI_104[4, 1, 3, ‘170.430’][1, 1, 2, ‘1976.162’][8, 1, 5, ‘763.837’][1, 1, 2, ‘737.405’][9, 1, 7, ‘169.564’][1, 1, 1, ‘204.868’]
TBI_105[1, 1, 4, ‘531.766’][3, 1, 5, ‘1840.146’][3, 1, 3, ‘2150.159’][8, 1, 9, ‘−964.441’][10, 1, 8, ‘932.014’][1, 1, 1, ‘458.617’]
TBI_106[3, 1, 3, ‘126.549’][5, 1, 6, ‘1661.255’][3, 1, 1, ‘470.235’][5, 1, 1, ‘−602.737’][1, 1, 1, ‘101.765’][1, 1, 1, ‘545.032’]
TBI_107[10, 1, 7, ‘38.000’][1, 1, 1, ‘648.972’][4, 1, 8, ‘2108.791’][1, 1, 1, ‘−625.873’][10, 1, 2, ‘1380.588’][2, 1, 1, ‘96.404’]
TBI_108[1, 1, 1, ‘176.033’][1, 1, 1, ‘335.184’][9, 1, 10, ‘516.831’][3, 1, 3, ‘14.186’][8, 1, 4, ‘141.479’][1, 1, 6, ‘55.569’]
TBI_109[1, 1, 1, ‘212.494’][4, 1, 8, ‘2406.468’][10, 1, 10, ‘998.789’][6, 1, 5, ‘369.640’][5, 1, 5, ‘396.094’][1, 1, 2, ‘367.743’]
TBI_110[5, 1, 6, ‘398.988’][5, 1, 1, ‘3183.328’][2, 1, 4, ‘1697.653’][5, 1, 1, ‘1905.199’][7, 1, 7, ‘1046.452’][1, 1, 1, ‘−224.253’]
TBI_111[5, 1, 1, ‘1689.427’][2, 1, 7, ‘1897.303’][1, 1, 4, ‘12588.356’][9, 1, 10, ‘−324.208’][3, 1, 1, ‘1771.921’][3, 1, 1, ‘58.025’]
TBI_112[1, 1, 2, ‘930.173’][3, 1, 1, ‘1124.876’][10, 1, 8, ‘3149.498’][7, 1, 10, ‘1.010’][8, 1, 7, ‘−708.170’][1, 1, 1, ‘179.101’]
Table A34. Median of the orders of optimal ARIMA models.
Table A34. Median of the orders of optimal ARIMA models.
ParameterMinute-by-Minute10-min-by-10-min
CleanArtifactCleanArtifact
p-Orderq-Orderp-Orderq-Orderp-Orderq-Orderp-Orderq-Order
ICP35233321
AMP33222311
RAP51221111
Table A35. Mean of the orders of optimal ARIMA models.
Table A35. Mean of the orders of optimal ARIMA models.
ParameterMinute-by-Minute10-min-by-10-min
CleanArtifactCleanArtifact
p-Orderq-Orderp-Orderq-Orderp-Orderq-Orderp-Orderq-Order
ICP3.917435.284403.825693.788993.230773.692313.653851.87500
AMP4.495414.201833.577983.724773.269233.721153.346152.35577
RAP5.128442.064222.954132.623852.346152.028852.932692.44231
Figure A6. Scatterplots for ICP p-orders and q-orders at different resolutions for each patient. (a) is minute-by-minute resolution and (b) is 10-mine-by-min resolution.
Figure A6. Scatterplots for ICP p-orders and q-orders at different resolutions for each patient. (a) is minute-by-minute resolution and (b) is 10-mine-by-min resolution.
Sensors 25 00586 g0a6
The figure demonstrates the value of the p-orders and q-orders from the optimal ARIMA models of ICP’s clean vs. artifact data at (a) minute-by-minute resolution and (b) 10-min-by-10-min resolution. The blue circles correspond to the orders of the clean data, whereas the red crosses represent the orders of the artifact segment. If a red cross overlaps a blue circle, the value of the order for that patient is the same. If they do not overlap, the values differ.
Figure A7. Scatterplots for AMP p-orders and q-orders at different resolutions for each patient. (a) is minute-by-minute resolution and (b) is 10-min-by-min resolution.
Figure A7. Scatterplots for AMP p-orders and q-orders at different resolutions for each patient. (a) is minute-by-minute resolution and (b) is 10-min-by-min resolution.
Sensors 25 00586 g0a7
The figure demonstrates the value of the q orders from the optimal ARIMA models of RAP’s clean vs. artifact group at (a) minute-by-minute resolution and (b) 10-min-by-10-min resolution.
Figure A8. Scatterplots for RAP q-orders at different resolutions for each patient. (a) is minute-by-minute resolution and (b) is 10-min-by-min resolution.
Figure A8. Scatterplots for RAP q-orders at different resolutions for each patient. (a) is minute-by-minute resolution and (b) is 10-min-by-min resolution.
Sensors 25 00586 g0a8
The figure demonstrates the values of the q-orders from the optimal ARIMA models of RAP’s clean vs. artifact group at (a) minute-by-minute resolution and (b) 10-min-by-10-min resolution.

Appendix G. Evaluation of the Potential Features for Identifying Artifacts

This appendix presents the values of the evaluation parameters for the potential features used in identifying artifacts at the minute-by-minute resolution and 10-min-by-10-min resolution.
AMP, pulse amplitude of ICP; ARIMA, auto-regressive integrated moving average; ICP, intracranial pressure, RAP, compensatory reserve index; RAP–ICP, cross-correlation between residuals of RAP and ICP; RAP–AMP, cross-correlation between residuals of RAP and AMP.
Table A36. Evaluation of potential features at the minute-by-minute resolution.
Table A36. Evaluation of potential features at the minute-by-minute resolution.
Total DataTrue ArtifactsPredicted ArtifactsFalse PositivesSuccess Rate (%)
Difference of the optimal ARIMA models
ICP4129238155239865.258
AMP148233562.115
RAP200221284.038
Medians of the variance of residuals
ICP4129238167199770.212
AMP136189756.916
RAP218184691.666
Median of the maximum cross-correlation of residuals
RAP–ICP412923888198537.011
RAP–AMP146185661.6
Table A37. Evaluation of potential features at the 10-min-by-10-min resolution.
Table A37. Evaluation of potential features at the 10-min-by-10-min resolution.
ParameterTotal DataTrue ArtifactsPredicted ArtifactsFalse PositivesSuccess Rate (%)
Difference of the optimal ARIMA models
ICP415191129055.336
AMP1029854.128
RAP831243.089
Medians of the variance of residuals
ICP415191622385.092
AMP1422274.264
RAP1621984.411
Median of the maximum cross-correlation of residuals
RAP–ICP4151912406.512
RAP–AMP724035.829

References

  1. Maas, A.I.R.; Menon, D.K.; Adelson, P.D.; Andelic, N.; Bell, M.J.; Belli, A.; Bragge, P.; Brazinova, A.; Büki, A.; Chesnut, R.M.; et al. Traumatic brain injury: Integrated approaches to improve prevention, clinical care, and research. Lancet Neurol. 2017, 16, 987–1048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Carney, N.; Totten, A.M.; O’Reilly, C.; Ullman, J.S.; Hawryluk, G.W.; Bell, M.J.; Bratton, S.L.; Chesnut, R.; Harris, O.A.; Kissoon, N.; et al. Guidelines for the Management of Severe Traumatic Brain Injury, Fourth Edition. Neurosurgery 2017, 80, 6–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Hawryluk, G.W.J.; Aguilera, S.; Buki, A.; Bulger, E.; Citerio, G.; Cooper, D.J.; Arrastia, R.D.; Diringer, M.; Figaji, A.; Gao, G.; et al. A management algorithm for patients with intracranial pressure monitoring: The Seattle International Severe Traumatic Brain Injury Consensus Conference (SIBICC). Intensive Care Med. 2019, 45, 1783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Chesnut, R.; Aguilera, S.; Buki, A.; Bulger, E.; Citerio, G.; Cooper, D.J.; Arrastia, R.D.; Diringer, M.; Figaji, A.; Gao, G.; et al. A management algorithm for adult patients with both brain oxygen and intracranial pressure monitoring: The Seattle International Severe Traumatic Brain Injury Consensus Conference (SIBICC). Intensive Care Med. 2020, 46, 919–929. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Le Roux, P.; Menon, D.K.; Citerio, G.; Vespa, P.; Bader, M.K.; Brophy, G.M.; Diringer, M.N.; Stocchetti, N.; Videtta, W.; Armonda, R.; et al. Consensus summary statement of the International Multidisciplinary Consensus Conference on Multimodality Monitoring in Neurocritical Care: A statement for healthcare professionals from the Neurocritical Care Society and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Intensive Care Med. 2014, 40, 1189–1209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Budohoski, K.P.; Czosnyka, M.; de Riva, N.; Smielewski, P.; Pickard, J.D.; Menon, D.K.; Kirkpatrick, P.J.; Lavinio, A. The relationship between cerebral blood flow autoregulation and cerebrovascular pressure reactivity after traumatic brain injury. Neurosurgery 2012, 71, 652–660; discussion 660–661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Calviello, L.; Donnelly, J.; Cardim, D.; Robba, C.; Zeiler, F.A.; Smielewski, P.; Czosnyka, M. Compensatory-Reserve-Weighted Intracranial Pressure and Its Association with Outcome After Traumatic Brain Injury. Neurocrit. Care 2018, 28, 212–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Kim, D.-J.; Czosnyka, Z.; Keong, N.; Radolovich, D.K.; Smielewski, P.; Sutcliffe, M.P.; Pickard, J.D.; Czosnyka, M. Index of cerebrospinal compensatory reserve in hydrocephalus. Neurosurgery 2009, 64, 494–501; discussion 501–502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Islam, A.; Froese, L.; Bergmann, T.; Gomez, A.; Sainbhi, A.S.; Vakitbilir, N.; Stein, K.Y.; Marquez, I.; Ibrahim, Y.; A Zeiler, F. Continuous monitoring methods of cerebral compliance and compensatory reserve: A scoping review of human literature. Physiol. Meas. 2024, 45, 06TR01. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Maksymowicz, W.; Czosnyka, M.; Koszewski, W.; Szymanska, A.; Traczewski, W. The role of cerebrospinal compensatory parameters in the estimation of functioning of implanted shunt system in patients with communicating hydrocephalus (preliminary report). Acta Neurochir. 1989, 101, 112–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Czosnyka, M.; Czosnyka, Z.; Keong, N.; Lavinio, A.; Smielewski, P.; Momjian, S.; Schmidt, E.A.; Petrella, G.; Owler, B.; Pickard, J.D. Pulse pressure waveform in hydrocephalus: What it is and what it isn’t. Neurosurg. Focus. 2007, 22, E2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Czosnyka, Z.; Keong, N.; Kim, D.; Radolovich, D.; Smielewski, P.; Lavinio, A.; Schmidt, E.A.; Momjian, S.; Owler, B.; Pickard, J.D.; et al. Pulse amplitude of intracranial pressure waveform in hydrocephalus. Acta Neurochir. Suppl. 2008, 102, 137–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Czosnyka, M.; Guazzo, E.; Whitehouse, M.; Smielewski, P.; Czosnyka, Z.; Kirkpatrick, P.; Piechnik, S.; Pickard, J.D. Significance of intracranial pressure waveform analysis after head injury. Acta Neurochir 1996, 138, 531–541; discussion 541–542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Sainbhi, A.S.; Vakitbilir, N.; Gomez, A.; Stein, K.Y.; Froese, L.; Zeiler, F.A. Time-Series autocorrelative structure of cerebrovascular reactivity metrics in severe neural injury: An evaluation of the impact of data resolution. Biomed. Signal Process Control 2024, 95, 106403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Froese, L.; Gomez, A.; Sainbhi, A.S.; Batson, C.; Stein, K.; Alizadeh, A.; Zeiler, F.A. Dynamic Temporal Relationship Between Autonomic Function and Cerebrovascular Reactivity in Moderate/Severe Traumatic Brain Injury. Front. Netw. Physiol. 2022, 2, 837860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Czosnyka, M.; Smielewski, P.; Timofeev, I.; Lavinio, A.; Guazzo, E.; Hutchinson, P.; Pickard, J.D. Intracranial Pressure: More Than a Number. Neurosurg. Focus 2007, 22, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Holm, S.; Eide, P.K. The frequency domain versus time domain methods for processing of intracranial pressure (ICP) signals. Med. Eng. Phys. 2008, 30, 164–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Carrera, E.; Kim, D.-J.; Castellani, G.; Zweifel, C.; Czosnyka, Z.; Kasprowicz, M.; Smielewski, P.; Pickard, J.D.; Czosnyka, M. What Shapes Pulse Amplitude of Intracranial Pressure? J. Neurotrauma 2010, 27, 317–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Islam, A.; Marquez, I.; Froese, L.; Vakitbilir, N.; Gomez, A.; Stein, K.Y.; Bergmann, T.; Sainbhi, A.S.; Zeiler, F.A. Association of RAP Compensatory Reserve Index with Continuous Multimodal Monitoring Cerebral Physiology, Neuroimaging, and Patient Outcome in Adult Acute Traumatic Neural Injury: A Scoping Review. Neurotrauma Rep. 2024, 5, 813–823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Weersink, C.S.A.; Aries, M.J.H.; Dias, C.; Liu, M.X.; Kolias, A.G.M.; Donnelly, J.M.B.; Czosnyka, M.; van Dijk, J.M.C.; Regtien, J.; Menon, D.K.P.; et al. Clinical and Physiological Events That Contribute to the Success Rate of Finding “Optimal” Cerebral Perfusion Pressure in Severe Brain Trauma Patients. Crit. Care Med. 2015, 43, 1952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Lee, H.-J.; Kim, H.; Kim, Y.-T.; Won, K.; Czosnyka, M.; Kim, D.-J. Prediction of Life-Threatening Intracranial Hypertension During the Acute Phase of Traumatic Brain Injury Using Machine Learning. IEEE J. Biomed. Health Inform. 2021, 25, 3967–3976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Tsigaras, Z.A.; Weeden, M.; McNamara, R.; Jeffcote, T.; Udy, A.A.; Anstey, J.; Plummer, M.; Bellapart, J.; Chow, A.; Delaney, A.; et al. The pressure reactivity index as a measure of cerebral autoregulation and its application in traumatic brain injury management. Crit. Care Resusc. 2023, 25, 229–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Needham, E.; McFadyen, C.; Newcombe, V.; Synnot, A.J.; Czosnyka, M.; Menon, D. Cerebral Perfusion Pressure Targets Individualized to Pressure-Reactivity Index in Moderate to Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review. J. Neurotrauma 2017, 34, 963–970. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Gaasch, M.; Schiefecker, A.J.; Kofler, M.; Beer, R.; Rass, V.; Pfausler, B.; Thomé, C.; Schmutzhard, E.; Helbok, R. Cerebral Autoregulation in the Prediction of Delayed Cerebral Ischemia and Clinical Outcome in Poor-Grade Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Patients*. Crit. Care Med. 2018, 46, 774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Sykora, M.; Czosnyka, M.; Liu, X.; Donnelly, J.; Nasr, N.; Diedler, J.; Okoroafor, F.; Hutchinson, P.; Menon, D.; Smielewski, P. Autonomic Impairment in Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Multimodal Neuromonitoring Study. Crit. Care Med. 2016, 44, 1173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Sorrentino, E.; Diedler, J.; Kasprowicz, M.; Budohoski, K.P.; Haubrich, C.; Smielewski, P.; Outtrim, J.G.; Manktelow, A.; Hutchinson, P.J.; Pickard, J.D.; et al. Critical thresholds for cerebrovascular reactivity after traumatic brain injury. Neurocrit. Care 2012, 16, 258–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Anonymous. Pandas-Python Data Analysis Library. Available online: https://pandas.pydata.org/ (accessed on 17 December 2024).
  28. Anonymous. Pandas. DataFrame. Describe—Pandas 2.2.3 Documentation. Available online: https://pandas.pydata.org/docs/reference/api/pandas.DataFrame.describe.html (accessed on 1 November 2024).
  29. Zeiler, F.A.; Donnelly, J.; Menon, D.K.; Smielewski, P.; Hutchinson, P.J.; Czosnyka, M. A Description of a New Continuous Physiological Index in Traumatic Brain Injury Using the Correlation between Pulse Amplitude of Intracranial Pressure and Cerebral Perfusion Pressure. J. Neurotrauma 2018, 35, 963–974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Howells, T.; Lewén, A.; Sköld, M.K.; Ronne-Engström, E.; Enblad, P. An evaluation of three measures of intracranial compliance in traumatic brain injury patients. Intensive Care Med. 2012, 38, 1061–1068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Varsos, G.V.; Czosnyka, M.; Smielewski, P.; Garnett, M.R.; Liu, X.; Kim, D.-J.; Donnelly, J.; Adams, H.; Pickard, J.D.; Czosnyka, Z. Cerebral critical closing pressure in hydrocephalus patients undertaking infusion tests. Neurol. Res. 2015, 37, 674–682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Kiening, K.L.; Schoening, W.N.; Stover, J.F.; Unterberg, A. Continuous monitoring of intracranial compliance after severe head injury: Relation to data quality, intracranial pressure and brain tissue PO2. Br. J. Neurosurg. 2003, 17, 311–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Anonymous. Mannwhitneyu—SciPy v1.14.1 Manual. Available online: https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/generated/scipy.stats.mannwhitneyu.html (accessed on 1 November 2024).
  34. Anonymous. F_oneway—SciPy v1.14.1 Manual. Available online: https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/generated/scipy.stats.f_oneway.html (accessed on 1 November 2024).
  35. Lütkepohl, H. New Introduction to Multiple Time Series Analysis; Springer Science & Business Media: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  36. Chatfield, C. The Analysis of Time Series: An Introduction, 6th ed.; Chapman and Hall/CRC: New York, NY, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Sharma, R.R.; Kumar, M.; Maheshwari, S.; Ray, K.P. EVDHM-ARIMA-Based Time Series Forecasting Model and Its Application for COVID-19 Cases. IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 2021, 70, 6502210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Li, Z.; Li, Y. A comparative study on the prediction of the BP artificial neural network model and the ARIMA model in the incidence of AIDS. BMC Med. Inform. Decis. Mak. 2020, 20, 143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Perktold, J.; Seabold, S.; Sheppard, K.; Quackenbush, P.; Arel-Bundock, V.; McKinney, W.; Langmore, I.; Baker, B.; Gommers, R.; Zhurko, Y.; et al. Statsmodels/Statsmodels: Release 0.14.2, Version v0.14.2. 2024. Available online: https://zenodo.org/records/10984387 (accessed on 13 January 2025).
  40. Huang, L.; Sullivan, L.; Yang, J. Analyzing the impact of a state concussion law using an autoregressive integrated moving average intervention analysis. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2020, 20, 898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Mohamadi, S.; Amindavar, H.; Tayaranian Hosseini, S.M.A. ARIMA-GARCH Modeling for Epileptic Seizure Prediction. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), New Orleans, LA, USA, 5–9 March 2017; pp. 994–998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Kębłowski, P.; Welfe, A. The ADF–KPSS test of the joint confirmation hypothesis of unit autoregressive root. Econ. Lett. 2004, 85, 257–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Anonymous. Pandas. DataFrame. Resample—Pandas 2.2.3 Documentation. Available online: https://pandas.pydata.org/docs/reference/api/pandas.DataFrame.resample.html (accessed on 1 November 2024).
  44. Eide, P.K.; Sroka, M.; Wozniak, A.; Sæhle, T. Morphological characterization of cardiac induced intracranial pressure (ICP) waves in patients with overdrainage of cerebrospinal fluid and negative ICP. Med. Eng. Phys. 2012, 34, 1066–1070. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Froese, L.; Dian, J.; Batson, C.; Gomez, A.; Unger, B.; Zeiler, F.A. The impact of hypertonic saline on cerebrovascular reactivity and compensatory reserve in traumatic brain injury: An exploratory analysis. Acta Neurochir 2020, 162, 2683–2693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Dias, C.; Silva, M.J.; Pereira, E.; Silva, S.; Cerejo, A.; Smielewski, P.; Rocha, A.P.; Gaio, A.R.; Paiva, J.-A.; Czosnyka, M. Post-traumatic multimodal brain monitoring: Response to hypertonic saline. J. Neurotrauma 2014, 31, 1872–1880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Zeiler, F.A.; Aries, M.; Cabeleira, M.; van Essen, T.A.; Stocchetti, N.; Menon, D.K.; Timofeev, I.; Czosnyka, M.; Smielewski, P.; Hutchinson, P.; et al. Statistical Cerebrovascular Reactivity Signal Properties after Secondary Decompressive Craniectomy in Traumatic Brain Injury: A CENTER-TBI Pilot Analysis. J. Neurotrauma 2020, 37, 1306–1314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Figure 1. ACF and PACF plots at minute-by-minute temporal resolution—patient example. (a) RAP pre-ARIMA plots, (b) RAP post-ARIMA (3, 1, 3) plots.
Figure 1. ACF and PACF plots at minute-by-minute temporal resolution—patient example. (a) RAP pre-ARIMA plots, (b) RAP post-ARIMA (3, 1, 3) plots.
Sensors 25 00586 g001
Figure 2. ACF and PACF plots at different resolutions—patient example. (a) At 10-min-by-10-min resolution with ARIMA (1, 1, 1), (b) at 30-min-by-30-min resolution with ARIMA (1, 1, 1), (c) at hour-by-hour resolution with ARIMA (1, 1, 1).
Figure 2. ACF and PACF plots at different resolutions—patient example. (a) At 10-min-by-10-min resolution with ARIMA (1, 1, 1), (b) at 30-min-by-30-min resolution with ARIMA (1, 1, 1), (c) at hour-by-hour resolution with ARIMA (1, 1, 1).
Sensors 25 00586 g002
Figure 3. Scatterplots for RAP p-orders at different resolutions for each patient. (a) at minute-by-minute resolution, (b) at 10-min-by-10-min resolution.
Figure 3. Scatterplots for RAP p-orders at different resolutions for each patient. (a) at minute-by-minute resolution, (b) at 10-min-by-10-min resolution.
Sensors 25 00586 g003
Table 1. Demographic data.
Table 1. Demographic data.
VariableMedian (IQR) or Number (%)
Duration of Recording (min)4125.13 (1714.99–7250.14)
Number of Patients109
Age (years)43 (29–57)
Sex (Male)89 (81.65%)
GCS7 (4–8)
GCS Motor4 (2–5)
Pupils
Bilateral Reactive65 (59.63%)
Unilateral Reactive25 (22.93%)
Bilateral Unreactive19 (17.43%)
Marshall CT Score
V55 (50.46%)
IV20 (18.34%)
III31 (28.44%)
II3 (2.75%)
CT, computerized tomography; GCS, Glasgow Coma Score; IQR, interquartile range.
Table 2. Global population median optimal models for each resolution.
Table 2. Global population median optimal models for each resolution.
Temporal ResolutionICPAMPRAP
Minute-by-minute5, 1, 13, 1, 53, 1, 3
10-min-by-10-min2, 1, 22, 1, 31, 1, 1
30-min-by-30-min2, 1, 22, 1, 21, 1, 1
Hour-by-hour2, 1, 21, 1, 11, 1, 1
AMP, pulse amplitude of ICP; ICP, intracranial pressure; RAP, compensatory reserve index.
Table 3. Global population median residuals of the signals.
Table 3. Global population median residuals of the signals.
ParameterOriginalOptimal ARIMA Model
ICP0.630080.17941
AMP0.493290.13549
RAP0.324930.12564
AMP, pulse amplitude of ICP; ARIMA, autoregressive integrated moving average; ICP, intracranial pressure; RAP, compensatory reserve index.
Table 4. A comparative analysis between clean and artifact segments’ optimal ARIMA models (p-values from Mann–Whitney U-test).
Table 4. A comparative analysis between clean and artifact segments’ optimal ARIMA models (p-values from Mann–Whitney U-test).
ParameterMinute-by-Minute10-min-by-10-min
p-Orderq-Orderp-Orderq-Order
ICP0.609960.000580.49778close to 0
AMP0.005010.206200.231750.00032
RAPclose to 00.015260.888080.94798
All the significant p-values are marked in bold. AMP, pulse amplitude of ICP; ARIMA, autoregressive integrated moving average; ICP, intracranial pressure; RAP, compensatory reserve index.
Table 5. Significant and insignificant counts after a Mann–Whitney U test between clean and artifact residuals.
Table 5. Significant and insignificant counts after a Mann–Whitney U test between clean and artifact residuals.
ParameterMinute-by-Minute10-min-by-10-min
SignificantInsignificantSignificantInsignificant
ICP63451779
AMP64452274
RAP6544896
AMP, pulse amplitude of ICP; ICP, intracranial pressure; RAP, compensatory reserve index.
Table 6. Medians and means of the variance of the residuals.
Table 6. Medians and means of the variance of the residuals.
ParameterMinute-by-Minute10-min-by-10-min
MedianMeanMedianMean
CleanArtifactCleanArtifactCleanArtifactCleanArtifact
ICP1.4184324.838652.00069266.457234.5688635.4796710.26831837.70208
AMP0.048420.616110.088912.299460.114530.091940.274483.60461
RAP0.105230.206760.108820.212220.087150.107940.094710.11736
AMP, pulse amplitude of ICP; ICP, intracranial pressure; RAP, compensatory reserve index.
Table 7. Medians and means of the maximum cross-correlations of residuals.
Table 7. Medians and means of the maximum cross-correlations of residuals.
ParameterMinute-by-Minute10-min-by-10-min
MedianMeanMedianMean
Clean and CleanClean and ArtifactClean and CleanClean and ArtifactClean and CleanClean and ArtifactClean and CleanClean and Artifact
RAP-ICP14.4887523.0138977.31971646.1451226.9232.4608836.9293121.002
RAP–AMP137.6346728.61530415.9138451.742344.43321.559195.831303.97946
Clean and clean refers to the cross-correlation between clean RAP and clean ICP (RAP–ICP) or clean RAP and clean AMP (RAP–AMP), whereas clean and artifact refers to clean RAP and artifact ICP (RAP–ICP) or clean RAP and artifact AMP (RAP–AMP).
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Islam, A.; Sainbhi, A.S.; Stein, K.Y.; Vakitbilir, N.; Gomez, A.; Silvaggio, N.; Bergmann, T.; Hayat, M.; Froese, L.; Zeiler, F.A. Characterization of RAP Signal Patterns, Temporal Relationships, and Artifact Profiles Derived from Intracranial Pressure Sensors in Acute Traumatic Neural Injury. Sensors 2025, 25, 586. https://doi.org/10.3390/s25020586

AMA Style

Islam A, Sainbhi AS, Stein KY, Vakitbilir N, Gomez A, Silvaggio N, Bergmann T, Hayat M, Froese L, Zeiler FA. Characterization of RAP Signal Patterns, Temporal Relationships, and Artifact Profiles Derived from Intracranial Pressure Sensors in Acute Traumatic Neural Injury. Sensors. 2025; 25(2):586. https://doi.org/10.3390/s25020586

Chicago/Turabian Style

Islam, Abrar, Amanjyot Singh Sainbhi, Kevin Y. Stein, Nuray Vakitbilir, Alwyn Gomez, Noah Silvaggio, Tobias Bergmann, Mansoor Hayat, Logan Froese, and Frederick A. Zeiler. 2025. "Characterization of RAP Signal Patterns, Temporal Relationships, and Artifact Profiles Derived from Intracranial Pressure Sensors in Acute Traumatic Neural Injury" Sensors 25, no. 2: 586. https://doi.org/10.3390/s25020586

APA Style

Islam, A., Sainbhi, A. S., Stein, K. Y., Vakitbilir, N., Gomez, A., Silvaggio, N., Bergmann, T., Hayat, M., Froese, L., & Zeiler, F. A. (2025). Characterization of RAP Signal Patterns, Temporal Relationships, and Artifact Profiles Derived from Intracranial Pressure Sensors in Acute Traumatic Neural Injury. Sensors, 25(2), 586. https://doi.org/10.3390/s25020586

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop