MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976341012 · doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2015.04.008

The autism puzzle: Diffuse but not pervasive neuroanatomical abnormalities in children with ASD

2015· article· en· W1976341012 on OpenAlexafffund
Dafna Sussman, Rachel C. Leung, Vanessa M. Vogan, W. Lee, S. Trelle, Sheng Lin, Daniel Cassel, M. Mallar Chakravarty, Jason P. Lerch, Evdokia Anagnostou, Margot J. Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroImage Clinical · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation HospitalMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University InstituteUniversity of TorontoSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsThalamusCytoarchitecturePsychologyOrbitofrontal cortexGyrificationAutism spectrum disorderNeuroanatomyAutismCerebellumBrain morphometryCerebral cortexAudiologyNeuroscienceMagnetic resonance imagingMedicineDevelopmental psychologyCognitionRadiologyPrefrontal cortex

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) is a clinically diagnosed, heterogeneous, neurodevelopmental condition, whose underlying causes have yet to be fully determined. A variety of studies have investigated either cortical, subcortical, or cerebellar anatomy in ASD, but none have conducted a complete examination of all neuroanatomical parameters on a single, large cohort. The current study provides a comprehensive examination of brain development of children with ASD between the ages of 4 and 18 years who are carefully matched for age and sex with typically developing controls at a ratio of one-to-two. Two hundred and ten magnetic resonance images were examined from 138 Control (116 males and 22 females) and 72 participants with ASD (61 males and 11 females). Cortical segmentation into 78 brain-regions and 81,924 vertices was conducted with CIVET which facilitated a region-of-interest- (ROI-) and vertex-based analysis, respectively. Volumes for the cerebellum, hippocampus, striatum, pallidum, and thalamus and many associated subregions were derived using the MAGeT Brain algorithm. The study reveals cortical, subcortical and cerebellar differences between ASD and Control group participants. Diagnosis, diagnosis-by-age, and diagnosis-by-sex interaction effects were found to significantly impact total brain volume but not total surface area or mean cortical thickness of the ASD participants. Localized (vertex-based) analysis of cortical thickness revealed no significant group differences, even when age, age-range, and sex were used as covariates. Nonetheless, the region-based cortical thickness analysis did reveal regional changes in the left orbitofrontal cortex and left posterior cingulate gyrus, both of which showed reduced age-related cortical thinning in ASD. Our finding of region-based differences without significant vertex-based results likely indicates non-focal effects spanning the entirety of these regions. The hippocampi, thalamus, and globus pallidus, were smaller in volume relative to total cerebrum in the ASD participants. Various sub-structures showed an interaction of diagnosis-by-age, diagnosis-by-sex, and diagnosis-by-age-range, in the case where age was divided into childhood (age < 12) and adolescence (12 < age < 18). This is the most comprehensive imaging-based neuro-anatomical pediatric and adolescent ASD study to date. These data highlight the neurodevelopmental differences between typically developing children and those with ASD, and support aspects of the hypothesis of abnormal neuro-developmental trajectory of the brain in ASD.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.090
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations104
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroImage ClinicalSame topicAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207