Recruitment of the left hemispheric emotional attention neural network in risk for and protection from depression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Family history of major depressive disorder (MDD) increases individuals' vulnerability to depression and alters the way depression manifests itself. Emotion processing and attention shifting are functions altered by MDD and family history of the disease; therefore, it is important to recognize the neural correlates of these functions in association with both factors. METHODS: Our study determines neural correlates of emotion processing and attention shifting for healthy individuals and patients with MDD with and without family history of depression. We compared the performance and neural activity in a functional magnetic resonance imaging experiment examining emotion processing and attention shifting in all participants. RESULTS: Our sample included 4 study groups: healthy controls without family history of depression (n = 25), patients with MDD without family history of the disease (n = 20), unaffected healthy first-degree relatives of patients with MDD (n = 21) and patients with MDD with family history of MDD (n = 30). Compared with healthy controls, unaffected first-degree relatives overactivate the somatosensory cortex and the attention controlling areas during both emotion processing and attention shifting. Patients with family history of MDD have stronger neural activation in subcortical areas during shifting attention from negative stimuli. Patients without family history of MDD have less activation in the paralimbic regions and more activation in core limbic areas, especially during emotion processing. LIMITATIONS: The conclusions about the intergroup differences in activation can be drawn only about neural areas engaged in the task. CONCLUSION: Unaffected first-degree relatives of patients with MDD overreact to external emotional cues and compensate for the vulnerability with increased involvement of executive control. Patients with a family history of MDD have less executive control over their attentional shifts in the face of negative stimuli. Patients without a family history of MDD process emotional stimuli in a more visceral way than controls.
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".