MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2188045538 · doi:10.1503/jpn.140384

Facial emotion processing in patients with social anxiety disorder and Williams–Beuren syndrome: an fMRI study

2016· article· en· W2188045538 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicWilliams Syndrome Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversitat de BarcelonaUniversitat Autònoma de BarcelonaInstituto de Salud Carlos IIIUniversidade de São PauloCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Salud MentalUniversitat Pompeu Fabra
KeywordsPsychologySocial anxietyFusiform gyrusFunctional magnetic resonance imagingFacial expressionPrefrontal cortexAnxietyAudiologyCognitionInferior temporal gyrusNeuroscienceTemporal lobeMedicinePsychiatryEpilepsy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Social anxiety disorder (SAD) and Williams-Beuren syndrome (WBS) are 2 conditions with major differences in terms of genetics, development and cognitive profiles. Both conditions are associated with compromised abilities in overlapping areas, including social approach, processing of social emotional cues and gaze behaviour, and to some extent they are associated with opposite behaviours in these domains. We examined common and distinct patterns of brain activation during a facial emotion processing paradigm in patients with SAD and WBS. METHODS: We examined patients with SAD and WBS and healthy controls matched by age and laterality using functional MRI during the processing of happy, fearful and angry faces. RESULTS: We included 20 patients with SAD and 20 with WBS as well as 20 matched controls in our study. Patients with SAD and WBS did not differ in the pattern of limbic activation. We observed differences in early visual areas of the face processing network in patients with WBS and differences in the cortical prefrontal regions involved in the top-down regulation of anxiety and in the fusiform gyrus for patients with SAD. Compared with those in the SAD and control groups, participants in the WBS group did not activate the right lateral inferior occipital cortex. In addition, compared with controls, patients with WBS hypoactivated the posterior primary visual cortex and showed significantly less deactivation in the right temporal operculum. Participants in the SAD group showed decreased prefrontal activation compared with those in the WBS and control groups. In addition, compared with controls, participants with SAD showed decreased fusiform activation. Participants with SAD and WBS also differed in the pattern of activation in the superior temporal gyrus, a region that has been linked to gaze processing. LIMITATIONS: The results observed in the WBS group are limited by the IQ of the WBS sample; however, the specificity of findings suggests that the pattern of brain activation observed for WBS is more likely to reflect a neurobiological substrate rather than intellectual impairment per se. CONCLUSION: Patients with SAD and WBS showed common and specific patterns of brain activation. Our results highlight the role of cortical regions during facial emotion processing in individuals with SAD and WBS.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.268 · 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