MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2936308843 · doi:10.1093/schbul/sbz018.505

F93. CLUSTER ANALYSIS ON CORTICAL THICKNESS OF DEFAULT MODE NETWORK-ASSOCIATED REGIONS IN PATIENTS WITH SCHIZOPHRENIA AND HEALTHY CONTROLS

2019· article· en· W2936308843 on OpenAlexaff
Liangbing Liang, Walter Heinrichs

Bibliographic record

VenueSchizophrenia Bulletin · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDefault mode networkSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)PsychopathologyHierarchical clusteringSchizoaffective disorderCognitionPsychologyNeuroscienceCluster (spacecraft)EndophenotypeNeuropsychologyCluster analysisPsychiatryPsychosisArtificial intelligenceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multiple clustering algorithms have been proposed to organize and thereby reduce the clinical, cognitive, neurobiological and functional heterogeneity in the schizophrenia spectrum. Cortical thickness (CT) is a key gene-mediated aspect of brain morphology that may reflect reduced synaptic structure and excessive pruning. It is also an aspect of neurobiology that correlates with the risk of developing schizophrenia. Previous heterogeneity-reducing strategies have included cluster analyses of CT values across the brain (Sugihara et al., 2017). However, cluster analytic approaches have not used regional values associated with the default mode network (DMN). Disruption or overreaction of DMN was found to be associated with psychopathology including schizophrenia (Buckner, Andrews-Hanna, & Schacter, 2008). CT was measured with a 3T short bore General Electric MRI machine and the obtained scans were processed with FreeSurfer. Cortical parcellations were obtained for 19 DMN-related regions of interest according to Destrieux, Fischl, Dale and Halgren (2010) and the DMN literature. We carried out agglomerative hierarchical cluster analysis on these CT data obtained from 63 healthy controls and 74 patients with a diagnosis of DSM-IV schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. Ward’s method with Euclidean distance was applied and the NbClust function in R was used to determine the optimal number of clusters. Demographic, clinical (PANSS) and cognitive (MCCB) measures were also obtained. Thirteen out of 30 clustering validity indices indicated a 3-cluster solution. The proportion of patients and controls varied significantly across clusters, X2 (2, N = 137) = 12.635, p = 0.002. The first cluster (n1=19) was composed of largely of patients (84%). A large second cluster (n2=92) comprised 50 patients and 42 healthy control participants. In contrast, two-thirds of the third cluster (n3=26) comprised healthy controls. However, there were no significant cluster differences in the distribution of males and females. MANCOVA on all 19 DMN-related regions revealed a main effect of cluster F(38, 230) = 7.467, p<0.001, with age as a significant covariate. Pairwise comparisons showed that mean cortical thinning was greater in cluster 1 than in cluster 2 on 17/19 DMN regions. Cluster 2 demonstrated significantly greater thinning than cluster 3 on 15/19 regions. Comparison of MCCB composite scores with age as a covariate showed significant differences between cluster 1 and 3 and between cluster 2 and 3. This study showed that a majority of schizophrenia patients cluster with healthy controls in terms of DMN-related regional cortical thickness. This suggests that DMN-specific cortical thinning is unlikely to reflect a disease process common to patients with a schizophrenia spectrum diagnosis and is more likely to represent an illness variant or a subtype. Potentially important but smaller subgroups exist and comprised primarily patients or controls. One largely patient-defined cluster demonstrated extensive thinning in DMN regions along with cognitive impairment, whereas patients were under-represented in a cluster marked by cognitive proficiency and greater thickness values. The findings imply that significant cortical thinning in the DMN is expressed in a minority of schizophrenia patients, especially those with cognitive impairment. These data may help explain the variability in the literature on this aspect of brain morphology and contribute to improved illness definition and reduced heterogeneity.

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)0.002
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.223 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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