Neural Substrates of Self-Regulatory Control in Children and Adults with Tourette Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify the neural substrate of self-regulatory control in children and adults with Tourette syndrome (TS). METHOD: We used event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to study the neural correlates of cognitive self-regulation during the Simon task. Forty-two people from The Tic Disorder Specialty Clinic who met the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition criteria for diagnosis with TS (24 children; 18 adults) were compared with 37 control subjects (19 children; 18 adults). Patients with TS were excluded from participation if they had any Axis I psychiatric disorder other than obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) or attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) prior to the onset of TS. Control participants were excluded if they reported a history of tic disorder, OCD, ADHD, or if they met diagnostic criteria for any Axis I disorder at the time of interview. RESULTS: We detected greater overall fMRI activation in adults than in children across both diagnostic groups, primarily in frontal and striatal regions. In both groups we also detected an age-related shift away from more general cortical activation toward a more specific reliance on frontostriatal activity, a developmental correlate that was exaggerated in the TS group despite behavioural performances similar to those of control subjects. Moreover, the severity of tics correlated positively with frontal activations across age groups. CONCLUSION: Frontostriatal circuits support cognitive and behavioural control. These circuits likely contribute both to optimal performance in this self-regulatory task and to the regulation of the severity of tics. Adults with persistent TS likely possess deficient activity in these circuits, attributable to either a failure of prefrontal plasticity or to disturbances in striatal functioning.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".