Cognitive profiles and associated structural brain networks in a multimorbid sample of marginalized adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Cognition is impaired in homeless and vulnerably housed persons. Within this heterogeneous and multimorbid group, distinct profiles of cognitive dysfunction are evident. However, little is known about the underlying neurobiological substrates. Imaging structural covariance networks provides a novel investigative strategy to characterizing relationships between brain structure and function within these different cognitive subgroups. METHOD: Participants were 208 homeless and vulnerably housed persons. Cluster analysis was used to group individuals on the basis of similarities in cognitive functioning in the areas of attention, memory, and executive functioning. The principles of graph theory were applied to construct two brain networks for each cognitive group, using measures of cortical thickness and gyrification. Global and regional network properties were compared across networks for each of the three cognitive clusters. RESULTS: Three cognitive groups were defined by: higher cognitive functioning across domains (Cluster 1); lower cognitive functioning with a decision-making strength (Cluster 3); and an intermediate group with a relative executive functioning weakness (Cluster 2). Between-group differences were observed for cortical thickness, but not gyrification networks. The lower functioning cognitive group exhibited higher segregation and reduced integration, higher centrality in select nodes, and less spatially compact modules compared with the two other groups. CONCLUSIONS: The cortical thickness network differences of Cluster 3 suggest that major disruptions in structural connectivity underlie cognitive dysfunction in a subgroup of people who have a high multimorbid illness burden and who are vulnerably housed or homeless. The origins, and possible plasticity of these structure-function relationships identified with network analysis warrant further study.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".