MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072966771 · doi:10.3389/fnsys.2014.00249

Comparison of the brain development trajectory between Chinese and U.S. children and adolescents

2015· article· en· W2072966771 on OpenAlex
Wanze Xie, John E. Richards, Du Lei, Kang Lee, Qiyong Gong

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Systems Neuroscience · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsBrain developmentWhite matterBrain sizeMagnetic resonance imagingBrain morphometryPsychologyNeuroscienceDevelopmental psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This current study investigated brain development of Chinese and American children and adolescents from 8 to 16 years of age using structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) techniques. Analyses comparing Chinese and U.S. children brain/head MR images were performed to explore similarities and differences in the trajectory of brain development between these two groups. Our results revealed regional and age differences in both brain/head morphological and tissue level development between Chinese and U.S. children. Chinese children's brains and heads were shorter, wider, and taller than those of U.S. children. There were significant differences in the gray matter (GM) and white matter (WM) intensity between the two nationalities. Development trajectories for cerebral volume, GM, and several key brain structures were also distinct between these two populations.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.512

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.240 · 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