MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951950273 · doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2019.101721

Individuals with 22q11.2 deletion syndrome show intact prediction but reduced adaptation in responses to repeated sounds: Evidence from Bayesian mapping

2019· article· en· W2951950273 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Kit Melissa Larsen, Morten Mørup, Michelle Rosgaard Birknow, Elvira Fischer, Line Olsen, Michael Didriksen, William F.C. Baaré, Thomas Werge, Marta I. Garrido, Hartwig R. Siebner

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroImage Clinical · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCongenital heart defects research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLundbeckfondenManitoba Mental Health Research FoundationUniversity of QueenslandKøbenhavns UniversitetBiogenStrongCentre of Excellence for Integrative Brain Function, Australian Research CouncilInnovationsfondenBiogen IdecGenzyme
KeywordsAdaptation (eye)Deletion syndromeSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Mismatch negativityPsychologyOddball paradigmAudiologyNeuroscienceElectroencephalographyBiologyEvent-related potentialGeneticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the most common copy number variants, the 22q11.2 microdeletion, confers an increased risk for schizophrenia. Since schizophrenia has been associated with an aberrant neural response to repeated stimuli through both reduced adaptation and prediction, we here hypothesized that this may also be the case in nonpsychotic individuals with a 22q11.2 deletion. We recorded high-density EEG from 19 individuals with 22q11.2 deletion syndrome (12-25 years), as well as 27 healthy volunteers with comparable age and sex distribution, while they listened to a sequence of sounds arranged in a roving oddball paradigm. Using posterior probability maps and dynamic causal modelling we tested three different models accounting for repetition dependent changes in cortical responses as well as in effective connectivity; namely an adaptation model, a prediction model, and a model including both adaptation and prediction. Repetition-dependent changes were parametrically modulated by a combination of adaptation and prediction and were apparent in both cortical responses and in the underlying effective connectivity. This effect was reduced in individuals with a 22q11.2 deletion and was negatively correlated with negative symptom severity. Follow-up analysis showed that the reduced effect of the combined adaptation and prediction model seen in individuals with 22q11.2 deletion was driven by reduced adaptation rather than prediction failure. Our findings suggest that adaptation is reduced in individuals with a 22q11.2 deletion, which can be interpreted in light of the framework of predictive coding as a failure to suppress prediction errors.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.523
Threshold uncertainty score0.742

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroImage ClinicalSame topicCongenital heart defects researchFrench-language works237,207