Distinguishing Between Major Depressive Disorder and Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder in Children by Measuring Regional Cortical Thickness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Cortical abnormalities have been noted in previous studies of major depressive disorder (MDD). OBJECTIVE: To hypothesize differences in regional cortical thickness among children with MDD, children with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), and healthy controls. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study of groups. SETTING: Children's Hospital of Michigan in Detroit. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 24 psychotropic drug-naive pediatric patients with MDD (9 boys and 15 girls), 24 psychotropic drug-naive pediatric outpatients with OCD (8 boys and 16 girls), and 30 healthy controls (10 boys and 20 girls). INTERVENTION: Magnetic resonance imaging. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Cortical thickness. RESULTS: In the right hemisphere of the brain, the pericalcarine gyrus was thinner in patients with MDD than in outpatients with OCD (P = .002) or healthy controls (P = .04), the postcentral gyrus was thinner in patients with MDD than in outpatients with OCD (P = .002) or healthy controls (P = .02), and the superior parietal gyrus was thinner in patients with MDD than in outpatients with OCD (P = .008) or healthy controls (P = .03). The outpatients with OCD and the healthy controls did not differ in these regions of the brain. The temporal pole was thicker in patients with MDD than in outpatients with OCD (P < .001) or healthy controls (P = .01), both of which groups did not differ in temporal pole thickness. The cuneus was thinner in patients with MDD than in outpatients with OCD (P = .008), but it did not differ from that in healthy controls. In the left hemisphere, the supramarginal gyrus was thinner in both patients with MDD (P = .04) and outpatients with OCD (P = .01) than in healthy controls, and the temporal pole was thicker in patients with MDD than in both healthy controls and outpatients with OCD (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first study to explore cortical thickness in pediatric patients with MDD. Although differences in some regions of the brain would be expected given neurobiological models of MDD, our study highlights some unexpected regions (ie, supramarginal and superior parietal gyri) that merit further investigation. These results underscore the need to expand exploration beyond the frontal-limbic circuit.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".