Searching the schizophrenic brain for temporal lobe deficits: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Several empirical studies have found temporal lobe impairments in many patients with schizophrenia. The strength and consistency of this evidence, however, has not been evaluated and synthesized quantitatively. Hence, we ask to what extent are temporal cortices really defective in schizophrenia? METHODS: Meta-analytical methods were used to determine the magnitude of evidence in support of structural and physiological temporal-hippocampal system deficits in schizophrenia. We report effect sizes from studies since 1980 that used structural (CT, MRI) and functional (SPECT, PET) neuroimaging methods. RESULTS: Both structural and functional imaging literatures are distinguished by heterogeneity whereby most patients show normative temporal function and structure, a minority shows diminished values and some patients demonstrate augmented function and structure rather than a deficit. CONCLUSIONS: The findings are hard to incorporate within single disease models that propose major involvement of the temporal system in schizophrenia, at least at the degree of resolution obtained with current imaging technology.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".