A meta-analysis of brain glutamate levels in bipolar disorder using 1H-magnetic resonance spectroscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective The objective of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis from the literature on brain glutamate in bipolar disorder (BD) as measured by 1H-magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS). Methods A search was conducted of Pubmed, Medline, Web of science, excerpta medica database (EMBASE), Cochrane library, China biomedical literature service system (SinoMed), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wan Fang data from January 1990 to June 2016 for those studies that used 1H-MRS to measure glutamate (Glu), or the Glu/creatine (Cr) ratio, Glu+ glutamine or Glu/glutamine (Glx) and the Glx/Cr ratio in any brain region in adult or child/adolescent patients with BD and healthy controls. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-ottawa quality assessment scale (NOS). A meta-analysis of the pooled data was conducted by using Review Manager 5.3 and STATA 12.0 software. Results A total of 27 English articles fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Meta-analysis showed that Glx (SMD:0.45, Z=2.39, P 0.05) and Glu/Cr (SMD: 0.06, Z=0.28, P>0.05). Subgroup analyses showed Glx was significantly increased in non-medicated, adults and non-euthymic group when compared to healty controls. The effect size of the brain glutamate metabolic indexes were decreased in medicated, child/adolescent and euthymic group when compared to non-medicated, adults and non-euthymic group except Glx/Cr index of the mood state subgroup when compared between subgroups. Conclusion The results of this meta-analysis suggest that brain Glx and Glx/Cr levels are increased in BD patients and there is a decreased trend of brain glutamate metabolic indexes levels after medication and in euthymic episodes, which support the idea that glutamate might play an important role in the pathophysiology of BD. Key words: Bipolar disorder; Magnetic resonance spectroscopy; Glutamic acid
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 | 0.015 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.018 | 0.056 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".