MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131582641 · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.62.11.1228

Functional Neuroanatomical Substrates of Altered Reward Processing in Major Depressive Disorder Revealed by a Dopaminergic Probe

2005· article· en· W2131582641 on OpenAlex

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

VenueArchives of General Psychiatry · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMajor depressive disorderFunctional magnetic resonance imagingPsychologyDopaminergicOrbitofrontal cortexDextroamphetaminePrefrontal cortexVentral striatumPutamenNeuroscienceDopamineInternal medicineMedicineStriatumAmphetamineAmygdala

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: The pathophysiology of major depressive disorder (MDD) includes disturbances in several neuroanatomical substrates and neurotransmitter systems. The challenge is to elucidate the brain mechanisms of MDD behavioral symptoms, chiefly those of anhedonia. OBJECTIVES: To visualize the neuroanatomical substrates implicated in altered reward processing in MDD, using functional magnetic resonance imaging in combination with a dopaminergic probe (a 30-mg dose of oral dextroamphetamine sulfate) to stimulate the brain reward system; and to test the hypothesis that a hypersensitive response to dextroamphetamine in MDD involves the prefrontal cortex and the striatum. DESIGN AND INTERVENTIONS: Among subjects with MDD and healthy control subjects, functional magnetic resonance imaging data were collected before and after single-blind administration of dextroamphetamine. SETTING: Subjects were recruited through local newspaper advertisements and by word of mouth. PARTICIPANTS: Twelve depressed subjects (mean age, 34.83 years; male-female ratio, 6:6) met criteria for MDD according to the DSM-IV, were not taking antidepressants, and had no comorbid Axis I disorders. Twelve control subjects (mean age, 29.33 years; male-female ratio, 5:7) were healthy volunteers without a history of Axis I disorders. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Functional magnetic resonance imaging blood oxygen level-dependent activation was measured during a controlled task, and dextroamphetamine-induced subjective effects were assessed using the Addiction Research Center Inventory. RESULTS: Subjects with MDD had a hypersensitive response to the rewarding effects of dextroamphetamine (2-fold increase; t(21) = 2.74, P = .01), with altered brain activation in the ventrolateral prefrontal cortex and the orbitofrontal cortex and the caudate and putamen (F(1,44) = 11.93, P = .001). CONCLUSION: Dopamine-related neuroanatomical substrates are involved in altered reward processing in MDD, shedding light on the neurobiology of the anhedonic symptoms in MDD and suggesting these substrates as future therapeutic targets.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.250 · 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