MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2411759106 · doi:10.1503/jpn.150093

Cortical thickness, volume and surface area in patients with bipolar disorder types I and II

2016· article· en· W2411759106 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Christoph Abé, Carl Johan Ekman, Carl M. Sellgren, Predrag Petrović, Martin Ingvar, Mikael Landén

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHypomaniaBrain sizeBipolar disorderMedicineManiaNeuroscienceCognitionPsychiatryMagnetic resonance imagingPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Bipolar disorder (BD) is a common chronic psychiatric disorder mainly characterized by episodes of mania, hypomania and depression. The disorder is associated with cognitive impairments and structural brain abnormalities, such as lower cortical volumes in primarily frontal brain regions than healthy controls. Although bipolar disorder types I (BDI) and II (BDII) exhibit different symptoms and severity, previous studies have focused on BDI. Furthermore, the most frequently investigated measure in this population is cortical volume. The aim of our study was to investigate abnormalities in patients with BDI and BDII by simultaneously analyzing cortical volume, thickness and surface area, which yields more information about disease- and symptom-related neurobiology. METHODS: We used MRI to measure cortical volume, thickness and area in patients with BDI and BDII as well as in healthy controls. The large study cohort enabled us to adjust for important confounding factors. RESULTS: We included 81 patients with BDI, 59 with BDII and 85 controls in our analyses. Cortical volume, thickness and surface area abnormalities were present in frontal, temporal and medial occipital regions in patients with BD. Lithium and antiepileptic drug use had an effect on the observed differences in medial occipital regions. Patients with the subtypes BDI and BDII displayed common cortical abnormalities, such as lower volume, thickness and surface area than healthy controls in frontal brain regions but differed in temporal and medial prefrontal regions, where only those with BDI had abnormally low cortical volume and thickness. LIMITATIONS: The group differences can be explained by progressive changes, but also by premorbid conditions. They could also have been influenced by unknown factors, such as social, environmental or genetic factors. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest diagnosis-related neurobiological differences between the BD subtypes, which could explain distinct symptoms and point to potential biomarkers that could inform the subtype diagnosis 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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.170

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations124
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Psychiatry and NeuroscienceSame topicBipolar Disorder and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207