MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098894213 · doi:10.1503/jpn.090186

Structural MRI correlates for vulnerability and resilience to major depressive disorder

2010· article· en· W2098894213 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Francesco Amico

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMajor depressive disorderAnterior cingulate cortexFamily historyGrey matterPutamenPsychologyDorsolateral prefrontal cortexInternal medicineWhite matterHippocampusMagnetic resonance imagingBasal gangliaMedicineAmygdalaPrefrontal cortexPsychiatryCentral nervous systemCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In major depressive disorder (MDD), it is unclear to what extent structural brain changes are associated with depressive episodes or represent part of the mechanism by which the risk for illness is mediated. The aim of this study was to investigate whether structural abnormalities are related to risk for the development of MDD. METHODS: We compared healthy controls with a positive family history for MDD (HC-FHP), healthy controls with no family history of any psychiatric disease (HC-FHN) and patients with MDD. Groups were age- and sex-matched. We analyzed data from high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging using voxel-based morphometry. We performed small volume corrections for our regions of interest (hippocampus, dorsolateral [DLPFC] and dorsomedial prefrontal cortex [DMPFC], anterior cingulate cortex [ACC] and basal ganglia) using a family-wise error correction (p < 0.05) to control for multiple comparisons. RESULTS: There were 30 participants in the HC-FHP group, 64 in the HC-FHN group and 33 patients with MDD. The HC-FHP group had smaller right hippocampal and DLPFC grey matter volumes compared with the HC-FHN group, and even smaller right hippocampal volumes compared with patients with MDD. In addition, the HC-FHP group exhibited smaller white matter volumes in the DLPFC and left putamen but also greater volumes in 2 areas of the DMPFC compared with the HC-FHN group. Patients with MDD exhibited smaller volumes in the ACC, DMPFC, DLPFC and the basal ganglia compared with healthy controls. LIMITATIONS: The retrospective identification of family history might result in a bias toward unidentified participants in the control group at risk for MDD, diminishing the effect size. CONCLUSION: Volume reductions in the hippocampus and DLPFC might be associated with a greater risk for MDD. The HC-FHP group had smaller hippocampal volumes compared with patients with MDD, which is suggestive for neuroplastic effects of treatment. The HC-FHP group had not yet experienced a depressive episode and therefore might have been resilient and might have had some protective strategies. Whether resilience is associated with the larger white matter volumes in the DMPFC (e.g., owing to compensatory, neuroplastic remodelling mechanisms) needs to be confirmed in future studies.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations257
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Psychiatry and NeuroscienceSame topicFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesFrench-language works237,207