Dissecting the heterogeneous subcortical brain volume of Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) using community detection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Structural brain alterations found in Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) have previously been very heterogeneous, with overall limited effect sizes for every region implicated. In this study, we aimed at exploring the existence of subgroups in ASD, based on neuroanatomic profiles; we hypothesized that effect sizes of case/control difference would be increased in defined subgroups. Using the dataset from the ENIGMA-ASD Working Group (n=2661), exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was applied on seven subcortical volumes of individuals with ASD and controls to uncover the underlying organization of subcortical structures. Based on earlier findings in ADHD patients and controls as well as data availability, we focused on three age groups: boys (aged 4-14 years), male adolescents (aged 14-22 years), and adult men (aged >=22 years). The resulting factor scores were used in a community detection (CD) analysis, to cluster participants into subgroups. Three factors were found in each sample, with the factor structure in adult men differing from that in boys and male adolescents. From the patterns in these factors, CD uncovered four distinct communities in boys and three communities in adolescents and adult men, irrespective of ASD diagnostic status. The effect sizes of case/control comparisons appeared more pronounced than in the whole sample in some communities. Based on subcortical volumes, we succeeded in stratifying our participants into more homogeneous subgroups with similar brain structural patterns. The stratification enhanced our ability to observe case/control differences of subcortical brain volumes in ASD, and may help explain some of the heterogeneity of previous findings in ASD.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".