Low white-matter integrity between the left thalamus and inferior frontal gyrus in patients with insomnia disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Previous studies have reported functional and structural abnormalities in the thalamus and the pars triangularis of the inferior frontal gyrus in patients with insomnia disorder. However, no studies have been conducted on the white-matter tracts between these 2 brain regions. We aimed to compare the white-matter integrity and structure of the left thalamus–pars triangularis tracts between patients with insomnia and controls, and to characterize the relationship between white-matter integrity and clinical features in patients with insomnia. Methods: In total, 22 participants with insomnia disorder and 27 controls underwent overnight polysomnography and brain magnetic resonance imaging, and then completed self-report clinical questionnaires and neurocognitive tests for spatial planning. Structural and diffusion measures such as fractional anisotropy, axial diffusivity, radial diffusivity and trace were analyzed in group comparison and correlation analyses. Results: The insomnia group showed significantly lower fractional anisotropy (F = 8.647, p = 0.02) and axial diffusivity (F = 5.895, p = 0.038) in the left thalamus–pars triangularis tracts than controls. In patients with insomnia, fractional anisotropy in the tracts was correlated with the results of the Stockings of Cambridge test (r = 0.451, p = 0.034), and radial diffusivity was correlated with Epworth Sleepiness Scale score (r = 0.437, p = 0.042). Limitations: Limitations included analyses of limited brain regions and the cross-sectional design. Conclusion: The insomnia group showed decreased integrity in the left thalamus–pars triangularis tracts, and integrity was correlated with cognition and daytime sleepiness. These results may imply that insomnia is characterized by disintegration of the white-matter tract between the left thalamus and inferior frontal gyrus.
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".