Developmental aspects of cortical excitability and inhibition in depressed and healthy youth: an exploratory study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this post-hoc exploratory analysis was to examine the relationship between age and measures of cortical excitability and inhibition. METHODS: Forty-six participants (24 with major depressive disorder and 22 healthy controls) completed MT, SICI, ICF, and CSP testing in a cross-sectional protocol. Of these 46 participants, 33 completed LICI testing. Multiple linear robust regression and Spearman partial correlation coefficient were used to examine the relationship between age and the TMS measures. RESULTS: In the overall sample of 46 participants, age had a significant negative relationship with motor threshold (MT) in both the right (r s = -0.49, adjusted p = 0.007; β = -0.08, adjusted p = 0.001) and left (r s = -0.42, adjusted p = 0.029; β = -0.05, adjusted p = 0.004) hemispheres. This significant negative relationship of age with MT was also observed in the sample of depressed youth in both the right (r s = -0.70, adjusted p = 0.002; β = -0.09, adjusted p = 0.001) and left (r s = -0.54, adjusted p = 0.034; β = -0.05, adjusted p = 0.017) hemispheres, but not in healthy controls. In the sample of the 33 participants who completed LICI testing, age had a significant negative relationship with LICI (200 ms interval) in both the right (r s = -0.48, adjusted p = 0.05; β = -0.24, adjusted p = 0.007) and left (r s = -0.64, adjusted p = 0.002; β = -0.23, adjusted p = 0.001) hemispheres. This negative relationship between age and LICI (200 ms interval) was also observed in depressed youth in both the right (r s = -0.76, adjusted p = 0.034; β = -0.35, adjusted p = 0.004) and left (r s = -0.92, adjusted p = 0.002; β = -0.25, adjusted p = 0.001) hemispheres. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that younger children have higher MTs. This is more pronounced in depressed youth than healthy controls. LICI inhibition may also increase with age in youth.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".