MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794947013 · doi:10.1093/schbul/sby016.431

T155. SEPARABLE AND REPLICABLE NEURAL STRATEGIES DURING SOCIAL BRAIN FUNCTION IN PEOPLE WITH AND WITHOUT SEVERE MENTAL ILLNESS

2018· article· en· W2794947013 on OpenAlexaff
Colin Hawco, Robert Buchanan, Navona Calrco, Benoit H. Mulsant, Joseph D. Viviano, Erin W. Dickie, Miklós Árgyelán, James M. Gold, Marco Iacoboni, Pamela DeRosse, George Foussias, Anil K. Malhotra, Aristotle N. Voineskos

Bibliographic record

VenueSchizophrenia Bulletin · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)CognitionBrain activity and meditationHierarchical clusteringBipolar disorderMental illnessCluster (spacecraft)Clinical psychologyPsychiatryDevelopmental psychologyCluster analysisMental healthElectroencephalographyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The case-control design and disease heterogeneity may be major limiting factors impeding biomarker discovery in brain disorders, including serious mental illness such as schizophrenia spectrum disorder (SSD) or bipolar disorder (BPD). We propose that this heterogeneity represents an opportunity for discovery by uncovering relevant biologically driven sub-types within disorders. Individuals with schizophrenia spectrum disorder (SSD) have deficits in social cognition related to poor functional outcome. A total of 109 SSD and 70 matched healthy controls (HC) were recruited across three sites. Participants performed an fMRI task in which they observed or imitated emotional faces. For each participant, an individual pattern of activity (Imitate > Observe for emotional faces) was identified. Hierarchical clustering (Ward’s method) identified clusters of individuals with similar patterns of activity. We then examined whether new data-driven groups of participants (based on patterns of brain activity) demonstrated performance differences on a batter of social and neuro cognitive tests completed out of the scanner. As a validation of the importance of cluster membership, Euclidean distance was compared between participants to members of their own cluster, diagnosis, or site. The clustering analysis was repeated on a replication sample consisting of 32 SSD, 37 euthymic BPD, and 39 HC. Three clusters with distinct patterns of neural activity were found. Cluster one (24 HC and 44 SSD) represented ‘typical activators’ (lateral frontal and parietal activity). Cluster two (21 HC and 31 SSD) were identified as ‘hyper-activators’, showing more intense and extended activity. This was interpreted as a ‘compensatory’ response of over-activation related to impaired neural circuits, such as is seen in aging. Interestingly, cluster three (25 Controls and 35 SSD) showed a very atypical pattern, including suppression of activity during imitation in regions involved in the default mode network and/or higher order social cognition (e.g. theory of mind). This group also had improved social cognitive performance relative to the other clusters. Participants were found to have more similar patterns of brain activity to members of their cluster rather than to members of their diagnostic group or scanning site. Importantly, when clustering was applied to the replication sample, the same three patterns (typical activators, hyper activators, and deactivators) were identified. In independently collected samples, our findings demonstrate different patterns of neural activity among individuals during a socio-emotional task that were independent of DSM-diagnosis or scan site. Our findings may provide objective neuroimaging endpoints (or biomarkers) for subgroups of individuals in target engagement research aimed at enhancing cognitive performance independent of diagnostic category.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSchizophrenia BulletinSame topicFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesFrench-language works237,207