Decreased integration of the frontoparietal network during a working memory task in major depressive disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Working memory deficits are a common feature in major depressive disorder and are associated with poor functional outcomes. Intact working memory performance requires the recruitment of large-scale brain networks. However, it is unknown how the disrupted recruitment of distributed regions belonging to these large-scale networks at the whole-brain level brings about working memory impairment seen in major depressive disorder. METHODS: We used graph theory to examine the functional connectomic metrics (local and global efficiency) at the whole-brain and large-scale network levels in 38 patients with major depressive disorder and 41 healthy controls during a working memory task. Altered connectomic metrics were studied in a moderation model relating to clinical symptoms and working memory accuracy in patients, and a machine learning method was employed to assess whether these metrics carry enough illness-specific information to discriminate patients from controls. RESULTS: =-2.2, 95% confidence interval = [-0.043,-0.002]). We achieved a classification accuracy and area under the curve of 73.42% and 0.734, respectively, to discriminate patients from controls based on connectomic metrics, and the global efficiency of the frontoparietal network contributed most to the diagnostic classification. CONCLUSIONS: We report a putative mechanistic link between the global efficiency of the frontoparietal network and impaired n-back performance in major depressive disorder. This relationship is more pronounced at lower levels of symptom burden, indicating the possibility of multiple pathways to cognitive deficits in severe major depressive disorder.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".