Evidence for fractional anisotropy and mean diffusivity white matter abnormalities in the internal capsule and cingulum in patients with obsessive–compulsive disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is evidence to suggest that obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is associated with structural abnormalities in cortico-striato-thalamic circuits, yet the extent of white matter abnormalities is not well established. In this study, we used diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) to examine white matter integrity in specific regions of interest (ROIs) in patients with OCD. METHODS: Patients with OCD and sex-, age- and IQ-matched healthy controls underwent DTI. The primary objective was to explore whether patients with OCD had white matter abnormalities in the anterior limb of the internal capsule (ALIC), the uncinate fasciculus, the genu of the corpus callosum and the cingulum. The secondary objective was to evaluate the relation between fractional anisotropy and mean diffusivity in these ROIs and other clinical variables (including age at onset of OCD, OCD severity and levels of depressive and anxiety symptomatology) in patients with OCD. RESULTS: There were 15 patients and 17 controls enrolled in our study. Compared with healthy controls, patients with OCD showed increased fractional anisotropy in bilateral regions of the ALIC adjacent to the body of the caudate, as well as decreased fractional anisotropy in the right anterior limb near the head of the caudate. Patients also had decreased mean diffusivity in the body of the right cingulum and the left anterior cingulum compared with controls. Correlational analyses revealed significant associations of fractional anisotropy and mean diffusivity in select circuits with OCD, depression and anxiety severity scores. LIMITATIONS: Inclusion of patients with OCD receiving pharmacotherapy may have been a limitation. In addition, the patients were heterogeneous in terms of their obsessive-compulsive symptom profiles; we did not distinguish between different obsessive-compulsive symptom dimensions. CONCLUSION: The study results provide further evidence for OCD-related white matter abnormalities in the ALIC and cingulum, consistent with a cortico striatal model of OCD.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".