In Vivo Evidence of Reduced Integrity of the Gray–White Matter Boundary in Autism Spectrum Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Atypical cortical organization and reduced integrity of the gray-white matter boundary have been reported by postmortem studies in individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). However, there are no in vivo studies that examine these particular features of cortical organization in ASD. Hence, we used structural magnetic resonance imaging to examine differences in tissue contrast between gray and white matter in 98 adults with ASD and 98 typically developing controls, to test the hypothesis that individuals with ASD have significantly reduced tissue contrast. More specifically, we examined contrast as a percentage between gray and white matter tissue signal intensities (GWPC) sampled at the gray-white matter boundary, and across different cortical layers. We found that individuals with ASD had significantly reduced GWPC in several clusters throughout the cortex (cluster, P < 0.05). As expected, these reductions were greatest when tissue intensities were sampled close to gray-white matter interface, which indicates a less distinct gray-white matter boundary in ASD. Our in vivo findings of reduced GWPC in ASD are therefore consistent with prior postmortem findings of a less well-defined gray-white matter boundary in ASD. Taken together, these results indicate that GWPC might be utilized as an in vivo proxy measure of atypical cortical microstructural organization in future studies.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".