Reduced Cerebellar Inhibition in Schizophrenia: A Preliminary Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Postmortem and structural imaging studies suggest that patients with schizophrenia have disrupted cerebellar activity. It has been speculated that these abnormalities mediate disorganized thought processes and psychosis. The authors' goal was to use transcranial magnetic stimulation to measure cerebellar inhibition, a proxy of cerebellar activity, as the principal output of the cerebellum is inhibitory. METHOD: Cerebellar inhibition was accomplished by delivering a magnetic cerebellar conditioning stimulus 5-15 msec before a magnetic test stimulus to the motor cortex. The cerebellar conditioning stimulus inhibits the size of the motor evoked potential produced by the test stimulus by approximately 50%. Ten patients with schizophrenia and 10 healthy comparison subjects completed the cerebellar inhibition protocol. RESULTS: Patients with schizophrenia demonstrated significant deficits in cerebellar inhibition compared with healthy subjects. CONCLUSIONS: The authors conclude that deficits in cerebellar inhibitory activity in schizophrenia may be the result of an abnormality in the cerebellum or disrupted cerebellar-thalamic-cortical connectivity.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".