MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009714651 · doi:10.1097/wnr.0b013e3282fa6d8d

Multivariate analyses suggest genetic impacts on neurocircuitry in schizophrenia

2008· article· en· W2009714651 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Emanuela Tura, Jessica A. Turner, James H. Fallon, James L. Kennedy, Steven G. Potkin

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroreport · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Research ResourcesUniversity of Victoria
KeywordsFunctional magnetic resonance imagingWorking memoryPsychologyNeuroscienceDorsolateral prefrontal cortexSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Prefrontal cortexMultivariate analysisMultivariate statisticsDopamine receptor D2Cognitive psychologyDopamineCognitionComputer scienceMachine learningPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigated the relationship of functional neurocircuitries and dopamine receptor D1 (DRD1) polymorphisms in schizophrenics during a working memory task. Participants performed the Serial Item Recognition Paradigm memory task during functional magnetic resonance imaging acquisition. We performed a data-driven multivariate analysis (partial least squares) to characterize brain network (covariance) patterns. Genetic testing identified two main genotypes. Accuracy did not differ between the groups. Covariance patterns of different areas (including the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and the inferior parietal lobule) were inversely related between the two genotypes. Two groups of schizophrenic patients with similar symptomatology and performance on a working memory task, but with distinct dopamine receptor genotypes, may use distinct neural systems to retrieve information.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.742
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations28
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroreportSame topicFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesFrench-language works237,207