Incidence rate and morphyology of cavum septum pellucidum in patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia, major depression: A structural MRI study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Several studies have independently suggested that schizophrenia patients are more likely to have an enlarged cavum septum pellucidum (CSP). However, neither finding has been consistently replicated. Objectives We recruited the relatively homogeneity population: treatment resistant schizophrenia (TRS) and treatment resistant depression (TRD).To investigate whether CSP was present more frequently in TRS or TRD patients than controls and the difference of CSP morphological characteristic between groups. Methods 1.5-Tesla MRI was used to evaluate the prevalence of CSP and morphology changes in 42 TRS, 45 TRD patients and 30 healthy controls. The CSP length, width and volume were measured using MRIcro and Analyze ™ 8.1 software. A CSP equal to or greater than 6 mm in length was defined as big CSP. Results TRS Patients had a significantly higher prevalence (6%) of the big CSP than TRD patients (0%) or controls (3.3%) while no significant difference on the prevalence of all CSP (TRS: 64.3%, TRD: 48.9%, controls: 50.0%) or small CSP between groups. Compared with controls or TRD patients, the values of CSP maximum width in patients with TRS were significant lower and CSP length were higher. There was no significant difference in the CSP volume between groups. Conclusions The incidence in Big CSP in TRS patients was higher than that of TRS patients or controls. The small CSP may be a kind of normal variant. There were different CSP developmental characteristics between TRS and TRD patients based on the MRI study.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".