MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085170324 · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhm082

Consequences of Variations in Genes that affect Dopamine in Prefrontal Cortex

2007· review· en· W2085170324 on OpenAlexaff
Adele Diamond

Bibliographic record

VenueCerebral Cortex · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute on Drug AbuseNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsPrefrontal cortexDopaminePsychologyAffect (linguistics)Catechol-O-methyl transferaseAttention deficit hyperactivity disorderWorking memoryCognitionNeuroscienceDorsolateral prefrontal cortexDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyPsychiatryGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Patricia Goldman-Rakic played a groundbreaking role in investigating the cognitive functions subserved by dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and the key role of dopamine in that. The work discussed here builds on that including: 1) Studies of children predicted to have lower levels of prefrontal dopamine but otherwise basically normal brains (children treated for phenylketonuria [PKU]). Those studies changed medical guidelines, improving the children's lives. 2) Studies of visual impairments (in contrast sensitivity and motion perception) in PKU children due to reduced retinal dopamine and due to excessive phenylalanine during the first postnatal weeks. Those studies, too, changed medical guidelines. 3) Studies of working memory and inhibitory control differences in typically developing children due to differences in catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) genotype, which selectively affect prefrontal dopamine levels. 4) Studies of gender differences in the effect of COMT genotype on cognitive performance in older adults. 5) A hypothesis about fundamental differences between attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) that includes hyperactivity and ADHD of the inattentive type. Those disorders are hypothesized to differ in the affected neural system, underlying genetics, responsiveness to medication, comorbidities, and cognitive and behavioral profiles. These sound quite disparate but they all grew systematically out the base laid down by Patricia Goldman-Rakic.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations128
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCerebral CortexSame topicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderFrench-language works237,207