Sex dependence of brain size and shape in bipolar disorder: an exploratory study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Anomalies of asymmetry and sex differences in brain structure have frequently been described in schizophrenic illnesses but have seldom been explored in bipolar disorder. METHODS: We measured volumes of the left and right frontal, temporal, parietal, and occipital lobes and computed the magnitude of brain torque (i.e., rightward frontal and leftward occipital asymmetry) for 49 patients with bipolar disorder and 47 healthy controls and performed an exploratory analysis of sex differences in patients and controls. RESULTS: Patients had significantly greater cerebrospinal fluid volume than controls, but no difference in total brain volume. There were no main effects of diagnosis in gray matter lobe volume or brain torque, but when analyses were performed separately for male and female subjects, significant sex-by-diagnosis interactions were found in the volume of the left frontal, left temporal, right parietal, and right occipital lobes, such that male patients with bipolar disorder tend toward larger, more symmetric brains than male controls, whereas female patients tend toward smaller, more asymmetric brains than female controls. CONCLUSION: The lateralised nature of these interactions was such that the normal sex difference in volume was significantly accentuated, whilst the normal sex difference in asymmetry tended to be diminished in patients with bipolar disorder. We conclude that bipolar disorder in part reflects an interaction between brain growth and sex along the anterior-posterior axis of the human brain.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".