Cortical thickness in bipolar disorder: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Bipolar disorder (BD) is a debilitating illness, the psychopathology of which is associated with aberrant structural and functional differences in the brain. Despite the many advances in psychiatric research, our understanding of the complex neurobiological underpinnings of BD remains incomplete. The aim of this review was to critically examine all available published magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) research reporting cortical thickness in BD with respect to a healthy population and/or other psychiatric samples. METHODS: The systematic search encompassed all relevant studies published until November 2014. Relevant papers were identified through an online search of select databases (MEDLINE and EMBASE) using key terms bipolar disorder or mania, and cortical thickness. Two independent raters determined the eligibility of papers and performed separate data extraction to ensure quality and accuracy of reporting. RESULTS: A total of 17 papers met the criteria and were included in this review. Compared to a healthy population, the majority of studies reported decreased cortical thickness in the left anterior cingulate/paracingulate and the left superior temporal gyrus, as well as several prefrontal regions bilaterally in patients with BD. Studies also show consistency of cortical thinning in individuals with BD and schizophrenia in frontal and temporal regions, suggesting some common neuropathology. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review further supports a link between specific structural brain abnormalities and BD. Future studies should investigate cortical thickness with respect to at-risk populations to determine whether these neuropathologies develop before or after the onset of BD.
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".