Examining the boundary sharpness coefficient as an index of cortical microstructure and its relationship to age and sex in autism spectrum disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is associated with atypical brain development. However, the phenotype of regionally specific increased cortical thickness observed in ASD may be driven by several independent biological processes that influence the gray/white matter boundary, such as synaptic pruning, myelination, or atypical migration. Here, we propose to use the boundary sharpness coefficient (BSC), a proxy for alterations in microstructure at the cortical gray/white matter boundary, to investigate brain differences in individuals with ASD, including factors that may influence ASD-related heterogeneity (age, sex, and intelligence quotient). Using a vertex-based meta-analysis and a large multi-center magnetic resonance structural imaging (MRI) dataset, with a total of 1136 individuals, 415 with ASD (112 female; 303 male) and 721 controls (283 female; 438 male), we observed that individuals with ASD had significantly greater BSC in the bilateral superior temporal gyrus and left inferior frontal gyrus indicating an abrupt transition (high contrast) between white matter and cortical intensities. Increases were observed in different brain regions in males and females, with larger effect sizes in females. Individuals with ASD under 18 had significantly greater BSC in the bilateral superior temporal gyrus and right postcentral gyrus; individuals with ASD over 18 had significantly increased BSC in the bilateral precuneus and superior temporal gyrus. BSC correlated with ADOS-2 CSS in individuals with ASD in the right medial temporal pole. Importantly, there was a significant spatial overlap between maps of the effect of diagnosis on BSC when compared to cortical thickness. These results invite studies to use BSC as a possible new measure of cortical development in ASD and to further examine the microstructural underpinnings of BSC-related differences and their impact on measures of cortical morphology.
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 | 0.007 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".