MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031495415 · doi:10.1503/jpn.090044

Structural abnormality of the substantia nigra in children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder

2010· article· en· W2031495415 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marcel Romanos, David Weise, Mira Schließer, Martin Schecklmann, Julia Löffler, Andreas Warnke, Manfred Gerlach, Joseph Claßen, Claudia Mehler‐Wex

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubstantia nigraEchogenicityAbnormalityDopaminergicAttention deficit hyperactivity disorderMedicineParkinson's diseasePsychologyNeuroscienceDopamineInternal medicinePsychiatryDiseaseRadiologyUltrasound

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Structural abnormality of the substantia nigra can be detected by transcranial sonography in neuropsychiatric disorders such as Parkinson disease and restless legs syndrome. We investigated echogenicity of the substantia nigra as a potential structural marker for dysfunction of the nigrostriatal dopamine system in children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). METHODS: We used a blinded design and determined echogenicity of the substantia nigra by use of transcranial sonography in 22 children with ADHD and 22 healthy controls matched for age and sex. RESULTS: The echogenic substantia nigra area was significantly larger in ADHD patients than in healthy controls (F(1,42) = 9.298, p = 0.004, effect size = 0.92). We found no effects of age or sex. LIMITATIONS: Owing to a lack of dimensional assessment, we could not analyze the correlation between echogenicity and clinical symptoms. CONCLUSION: Our results support the hypothesis that the nigrostriatal dopaminergic system is abnormal in children with ADHD.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.299

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.265 · 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.

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

Citations63
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Psychiatry and NeuroscienceSame topicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderFrench-language works237,207