The Impact of 6 and 12 Months in Space on Human Brain Structure and Intracranial Fluid Shifts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
= 10 astronauts) missions impact brain structure and fluid shifts. We collected MRI scans once before flight and four times after flight. Astronauts served as their own controls; we evaluated pre- to postflight changes and return toward preflight levels across the 4 postflight points. We also provide data to illustrate typical brain changes over 7 years in a reference dataset. Twelve months in space generally resulted in larger changes across multiple brain areas compared with 6-month missions and aging, particularly for fluid shifts. The majority of changes returned to preflight levels by 6 months after flight. Ventricular volume substantially increased for 1 of the 12-month astronauts (left: +25%, right: +23%) and the 6-month astronauts (left: 17 ± 12%, right: 24 ± 6%) and exhibited little recovery at 6 months. Several changes correlated with past flight experience; those with less time between subsequent missions had larger preflight ventricles and smaller ventricular volume increases with flight. This suggests that spaceflight-induced ventricular changes may endure for long periods after flight. These results provide insight into brain changes that occur with long-duration spaceflight and demonstrate the need for closer study of fluid shifts.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".