Cortical folding in patients with bipolar disorder or unipolar depression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Analysis of cortical folding may provide insight into neurodevelopment deviations, which, in turn, can predispose to depression that responds particularly poorly to medications. We hypothesized that patients with treatment-resistant depression would exhibit measurable alterations in cortical folding. METHODS: We computed hemispheric global sulcal indices (g-SIs) in T(1)-weighted magnetic resonance images obtained from 76 patients and 70 healthy controls. We separately searched for anatomic deviations in patients with bipolar disorder (16 patients with treatment-resistant depression, 25 with euthymia) and unipolar depression (35 patients with treatment-resistant depression). RESULTS: Compared with healthy controls, both groups of patients with treatment-resistant depression exhibited reduced g-SIs: in the right hemisphere among patients with bipolar disorder and in both hemispheres among those with unipolar depression. Patients with euthymic bipolar disorder did not differ significantly from depressed patients or healthy controls. Among patients with bipolar disorder who were taking lithium, we found positive correlations between current lithium dose and g-SIs in both hemispheres. LIMITATIONS: We cannot estimate the extent to which the observed g-SI reductions are linked to treatment resistance and to what extent they are state-dependent. Furthermore, we cannot disentangle the impact of medications from that of the affective disorder. Finally, there is interindividual variation and overlap of g-SIs among patients and healthy controls that need to be considered when interpreting our results. CONCLUSION: Reduced global cortical folding surface appears to be characteristic of patients with treatment-resistant depression, either unipolar or bipolar. In patients with bipolar disorder, treatment with lithium may modify cortical folding surface.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".