P300 Source Localization Contrasts in Body-Focused Repetitive Behaviors and Tic Disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tic disorders (TD) and body-focused repetitive behaviors (BFRB) have similar phenotypes that can be challenging to distinguish in clinical settings. Both disorders show high rates of comorbid psychiatric conditions, dysfunctional basal ganglia activity, atypical cortical functioning in the prefrontal and motor cortical regions, and cognitive deficits. Clinicians frequently confound the two disorders and it is important to find reliable objective methods to discriminate TD and BFRB. Neuropsychological tests and event-related potential (ERP) studies have yielded inconsistent results regarding a possible context updating deficit in TD and BFRB patients. However, most previous studies did not control for the presence of comorbid psychiatric condition and medication status, which might have confounded the findings reported to date. Hence, we aimed to investigate the psychophysiology of working memory using ERP in carefully screened TD and BFRB patients excluding those with psychiatric comorbidity and those taking psychoactive medication. The current study compared 12 TD patients, 12 BRFB patients, and 15 healthy control participants using a motor oddball task (button press). The P300 component was analyzed as an index of working memory functioning. Results showed that BFRB patients had decreased P300 oddball effect amplitudes over the right hemisphere compared to the TD and control groups. Clinical groups presented different scalp distributions compared to controls, which could represent a potential endophenotype candidate of BFRB and TD.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".