Neural correlates of verbal recognition memory in obese adults with and without major depressive disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Obesity and major depressive disorder (MDD) independently contribute to memory impairment. Little is known about shared neural mechanisms that may result in the cognitive impairment experienced by these populations. This study's aim was to determine how obesity impacts neural activity during a verbal recognition memory task in individuals both with and without MDD. METHODS: Functional magnetic resonance imaging was employed to examine whether differences in neural activation patterns would be seen across three groups during the Warrington's Recognition Memory Test. Three study groups are reported: 20 subjects with obesity but without MDD (bariatric controls), 23 subjects with past or current MDD and obesity, and 20 normal BMI controls (healthy controls). RESULTS: Three-group conjunction analyses indicated that overlapping neural regions were activated during both encoding and retrieval processes across all groups. However, second-level 2-group t-contrasts indicated that neural activation patterns differed when comparing healthy and bariatric controls, and when comparing bariatric controls and bariatric MDD participants. DISCUSSION: Results indicate that obesity in conjunction with MDD confers a subtle impact on neural functioning. Given high rates of obesity and MDD comorbidity, and the role of cognition on ability to return to premorbid level of functioning, this association should inform treatment decisions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".