Imaging sex/gender and autism in the brain: Etiological implications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The male preponderance in autism prevalence has brought together the disparate topics of sex/gender and autism research. Two directions of neuroimaging studies on the relationships between sex/gender and autism may inform male-specific risk mechanisms and female-specific protective mechanisms of autism. First, we review how sex/gender moderates autism-related brain changes and how this informs general models of autism etiology. Better-powered human neuroimaging studies suggest that the brain characteristics of autism are qualitatively, rather than simply quantitatively, different between males and females. However, age and comorbidities might substantially moderate the pattern of differences. Second, we review how the relationship between autism-related brain changes (separately in males and females) and normative brain sex/gender differences informs specific etiological-developmental mechanisms. Both human and animal studies converge to indicate that the brain characteristics of autism are partly associated with normative brain sex/gender differences, suggesting convergence or overlap between the mechanisms leading to and modifying the development of autism and the mechanisms underlying sex differentiation and/or gender socialization. Future animal work needs to investigate sex differences in rodent mutants modeling autism-relevant genes and environmental exposures. Future human work needs to address the substantial phenotypic and etiological heterogeneity of autism and to focus on longitudinal neuroimaging studies (from early development) on the developmental trajectories of sex/gender-differential neural characteristics of autism. Combining animal and human work links up the causal chain from etiological factors, brain and physical development, to phenotypes. These together help delineate the different roles of sex and gender in relation to risk vs. protective mechanisms. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".