Tool Reference · Beyond Brain Health™

Neurologic Stress &
Recovery Index™ (NSRI™)

The first assessment tool designed to quantify the brain's capacity to absorb and recover from the neurologic stress of surgery and anesthesia — built on 127 verified peer-reviewed references, validated in a 2,062-completer research window.

DeveloperSandra Bargeron, PA-C, CAA
Current VersionV2.5 · March 2026
Dataset2,062 completers
Evidence Base127 peer-reviewed references
Overview

What Is the NSRI™?

I built the NSRI™ because the question I kept asking in the OR lacked a measurement tool. Cognitive assessment tools detect existing impairment. What they cannot do is tell a patient or a practitioner what to change before surgery to optimize and protect the brain. That roadmap didn't exist. So I built it.

The NSRI™ is a pre-surgical brain resilience assessment — the core measurement tool of Beyond Brain Health™ and the first instrument designed specifically to quantify neurologic reserve and recovery dynamics before surgical exposure.

The NSRI™ quantifies. It does not diagnose. Its clinical function is to measure the brain's current resilience state, identify modifiable factors that can be strengthened before surgery, and detect historical vulnerability factors that constrain recovery capacity.

Nasreddine ZS et al. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2005;53(4):695-699. [Ref 78, Landmark]
Folstein MF et al. J Psychiatr Res. 1975;12(3):189-198. [Ref 79, Landmark]
Assessment Architecture

How the NSRI™ Is Built

V2.5 — the version that closed the research window with 2,062 completers on March 19, 2026.

Questions
~85+
with conditional branching; typical path 38–55 questions
Scored Domains
5
D1–D5, rescaled to 0–100 final score
History Sections
H1–H10
Bottleneck Index™ contributors
Modifiable Ratio
~81%
of scored items are modifiable factors
Interaction Penalties
3
validated compound risk scenarios
PRC Proxy Tags
9
items tagged for autonomic regulation inference
Evidence Sections
24
sections A–X; all verified via PubMed/DOI, March 2026
Completion Rate
72.8%
research window dataset
Bottleneck Index™
0.00–1.00
multiplicative modifier; mean: 0.298; median: 0.250
Score Distribution: Mean 65.9 · SD 13.8 · Range 8–99 · Mild negative skew (−0.516) · Final score formula: proprietary
Score Distribution & Risk Tiers

What the Population Data Shows

Formal normality testing confirms the distribution supports parametric statistical tests. 30.1% of a health-engaged, self-selected population already showed quantifiable neurologic vulnerability — standard intake would have cleared all of them.

Risk Tier Distribution — 2,062 Completers
High Risk (<40) 4.3%
89
Elevated (40–59) 25.8%
531
Moderate (60–79) 52.8%
1,089
Low Risk (≥80) 17.1%
353
30.1% elevated or high-risk — in a proactively-screened, health-literate population. A conservative floor.
Score Distribution — Normality Check
Percentile Expected Actual Δ
10th48.347.0−1.3
25th56.657.0+0.4
50th (median)65.967.0+1.1
75th75.276.0+0.8
90th83.583.0−0.5
Shapiro-Wilk W=0.9803 · KS D=0.0626 · n=2,062
The mild negative skew (−0.516) indicates more scores cluster in the moderate-to-high range, with a longer tail toward very low scores. This is clinically coherent for a health-engaged, self-selected population. The instrument is working as designed.
Source: NSRI™ V2.5 Research Window Dataset — 2,062 completers, research window closed March 19, 2026. Sandra Bargeron, PA-C, CAA · Beyond Brain Health™
The Five Scored Domains

Research Window Findings

Domain intercorrelations range from r=0.245 to r=0.39 — moderately positive, confirming the five domains are related but not redundant. Each contributes an independent signal.

D1
Cardiometabolic Health
Refs 45–52, 87–93
76.8%pop. mean (16.9/22)
r=0.628vs final score
D2
Medication & Pain Burden
Refs 53–62, 106–115
83.7%pop. mean (16.7/20)
r=0.654vs final score
D3
Sleep & Circadian Health
Refs 63–66 · Highest-impact domain
CV 31.6%highest variance
r=0.681strongest predictor
17.8% scored below 10/20 — clearest standalone intervention target
D4
Lifestyle Factors
Refs 67–72, 116–120
13.9/20lowest domain mean
r=0.509vs final score
D5
Brain & Social Health
Refs 73–77, 29
80.0%pop. mean (14.5/18)
r=0.583vs final score
Source: NSRI™ V2.5 Research Window Dataset — 2,062 completers, March 2026. Sandra Bargeron, PA-C, CAA · Beyond Brain Health™
Bottleneck Index™

Historical Vulnerability — Core Analysis

The Bottleneck Index™ is a multiplicative modifier (0.00–1.00) derived from 10 history sections. It separates what the brain can optimize from what it permanently carries.

0%
carry ≥1 Bottleneck factor
0%
significant BI (>0.35)
r=−0.710
BI vs final score (p<0.0001)
−25.0 pts
Q1 vs Q4 BI score differential (76.7 → 51.7)
Bottleneck Contributor Analysis
Point-biserial correlations — all p-values effectively zero
Contributor % Present r vs BI r vs Score
Prior surgical delirium (H1) 34.0% 0.727*** −0.466***
Anesthesia reactions (H6) 31.5% 0.651*** −0.458***
Functional frailty (H11) 22.0% 0.363*** −0.437***
Head injury / TBI (H2) 69.2% 0.397*** −0.280***
Prior anesthesia exposure (H5) 66.2% 0.325*** −0.295***
Family history (H3) 52.7% 0.310*** −0.166***
Connective tissue/autonomic (H9) 18.6% 0.319*** −0.273***
Cancer treatment history (H10) 10.3% 0.134*** −0.078***
Source: NSRI™ V2.5 Dataset · 2,062 completers · March 2026
Dominant Clinical Finding

Prior surgical delirium (r=0.727 vs BI) is the single strongest predictor in the entire dataset. Participants with this history have a Bottleneck Index of 0.516, compared with 0.186 in those without — nearly 3× higher. Mean final score: 56.9 (delirium present) vs 70.5 (absent) — a 13.5-point differential. p=5.96×10⁻²³⁵.

This is not a marginal signal. It is a clinical alarm.

Sex-Stratified Analysis

Sex-Stratified Analysis

The research window cohort consisted of 89.6% females (n=1,847; n=208 males) — representing a clear demographic skew consistent with the populations most affected by connective tissue and autonomic disorders.

Despite different bottleneck profiles by sex, final NSRI™ scores are statistically similar (Mann-Whitney U, p=0.705; Cohen's d=0.056: negligible effect size). The NSRI™ assesses neurologic vulnerability comparably across sexes, even with meaningful demographic and clinical differences. The multi-domain design accounts for these variations.

Clinical Scope

What the NSRI™ Does Not Do

The NSRI™ does not diagnose cognitive impairment, POCD, postoperative delirium, or any neurologic condition. It does not predict with certainty who will experience cognitive complications. It does not replace clinical evaluation by a licensed healthcare provider.

The four score bands were created using clinical reasoning and data structure. The next step is to formally validate these outcomes by linking pre-surgical NSRI™ scores to postoperative cognitive dysfunction rates and actual recovery patterns through structured follow-up at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, and 3 months.

This is a documented gap being actively closed, not an oversight.
Who It's For

Who the NSRI™ Is For

  • Adults preparing for any elective or semi-elective surgical procedure
  • Adults over 40, with or without existing cognitive concerns
  • Patients with prior anesthesia complications or prolonged cognitive recovery
  • Patients with chronic conditions compounding neurologic risk: metabolic syndrome, sleep disorders, polypharmacy, chronic pain, neuroinflammatory history, frailty
  • Patients with connective tissue/autonomic disorders (EDS, POTS, MCAS) — populations with documented anesthetic sensitivity
  • Functional and integrative medicine practitioners seeking measurement infrastructure for surgical preparation programs
Clinical Application

The HARP™ Framework

HARP™ — Holistic Anesthesia Recovery & Preparation — is the clinical application framework built on NSRI™ measurement. It translates findings into a four-step sequence. A framework, not a protocol.

H
Health Assessment
Use the NSRI™ to measure baseline neurologic resilience and identify specific modifiable bottlenecks before surgery.
A
Address Exposures
Reduce environmental and physiologic burdens — medications, sleep disruptors, metabolic stressors — that weaken neurologic reserve.
R
Resilience Building
Introduce targeted protocols to strengthen identified weak domains in the preoperative window — before the surgical event.
P
Post-Surgical Protection
Implement recovery strategies to support brain return to baseline and accelerate cognitive restoration after surgery.
Developer & Credentials
Sandra Bargeron, PA-C, CAA

Sandra Bargeron, PA-C, CAA

Physician Assistant-Certified and Certified Anesthesiologist Assistant (Anesthetist) — 22 years of clinical experience, 16 years in anesthesia, 10,000+ cases.

After enough cases, the pattern was unmistakable: some patients woke up clear and recovered fast. Others fought for weeks. Same drugs, same procedure, different brains. No one was measuring what made the difference before we started. That is what the NSRI™ was built to address.

Also author of Break Through Anesthesia Fog: Protect Your Brain and Heal Faster After Surgery (April 2026, afteranesthesia.com) and host of ReThink It: The Brain Health & Longevity Podcast.

Beyond Brain Health™ · beyondbrainhealth.com

The NSRI™ quantifies what has never been routinely measured before surgery: the brain's actual capacity to absorb and recover from the neurologic stress of anesthesia.

2,062 completers · Mean score: 65.9 · 96.2% carry a Bottleneck factor · 30.1% elevated or high-risk · 127 verified references · 81% of scored factors modifiable
Reference Library

Full Reference List

Key references from this page. Full 127-reference library at beyondbrainhealth.com/nsri-evidence.

Landmark Studies 10
  1. [1] Livingston G et al. Lancet. 2024;404(10452):572-628.
  2. [4] Evered L et al. Br J Anaesth. 2018;121(5):1005-1012.
  3. [10] Inouye SK et al. Lancet. 2014;383(9920):911-922.
  4. [29] Stern Y. Lancet Neurol. 2012;11(11):1006-1012.
  5. [53] Rudolph JL et al. Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(5):508-513.
  6. [54] Gray SL et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2015;175(3):401-407.
  7. [58] Billioti de Gage S et al. BMJ. 2014;349:g5205.
  8. [71] Fried LP et al. J Gerontol A. 2001;56(3):M146-156.
  9. [78] Nasreddine ZS et al. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2005;53(4):695-699.
  10. [121] Hirad AA et al. Sci Adv. 2019;5(8):eaau3460.
Score Distribution & Assessment Validity 4
  1. [6] Vlisides P, Bhattacharya S. Maturitas. 2025;194:108148.
  2. [7] Taffett NT et al. J Clin Med. 2023;12(4):1610.
  3. [79] Folstein MF et al. J Psychiatr Res. 1975;12(3):189-198.
  4. [88] Feinkohl I et al. Br J Anaesth. 2023;131(2):338-347.
Sleep Domain (D3) 3
  1. [63] Shi L et al. Sleep Med Rev. 2018;40:4-16.
  2. [65] Flink BJ et al. Anesthesiology. 2012;116(4):788-796.
  3. [66] Gupta R et al. Sleep Med Clin. 2022;17(3):467-482.
Bottleneck & Historical Vulnerability 6
  1. [22] Gu D et al. Neuroepidemiology. 2022;56(1):4-16.
  2. [45] Biessels GJ et al. Lancet Neurol. 2006;5(1):64-74.
  3. [107] Crowe SF, Stranks EK. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2018;33(7):901-911.
  4. [128] Khan A et al. Biology (Basel). 2025;14(6):640.
  5. [133] Terrando N et al. Ann Neurol. 2011;70(6):986-995.
  6. [137] Abboud A et al. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2021;92(8):897-911.