Regional cortical thinning may be a biological marker for borderline personality disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We investigated cerebral cortical thickness and its relation to measurements of difficulties with identifying and describing emotions in patients with borderline personality disorder (BPD). METHOD: Eighteen SCID-II-diagnosed female patients with BPD and 21 healthy female controls underwent magnetic resonance imaging and completed the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS). First, regional cortical thickness across the cerebral surface was compared between patients and healthy controls. Then, analyses of the association between cortical thickness and TAS subscales were performed in patients. RESULTS: Compared with controls, patients exhibited clusters of significantly reduced cortical thickness in the left medial and lateral prefrontal cortex, left temporoparietal junction, bilateral temporal poles, and bilateral paracentral lobules. Significant negative associations were observed between cortical thickness and the 'Difficulties Describing Feelings' TAS subscale (DDF) scores in patients. The anatomical distribution of these associations was highly overlapping with the group differences in cortical thickness. CONCLUSION: The pattern of regions exhibiting cortical thinning in patients resembles a network of cortical structures repeatedly shown to be involved in social cognition. The results of the DDF analyses suggest that the thinning may partly be related to interpersonal dysfunction in patients with BPD. The pattern of thinning may represent a potential biological marker for BPD.
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 | 0.001 | 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".