Correspondence between patterns of cerebral blood flow and structure in adolescents with and without bipolar disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adolescence is a period of rapid development of the brain’s inherent functional and structural networks; however, little is known about the region-to-region organization of adolescent cerebral blood flow (CBF) or its relationship to neuroanatomy. Here, we investigate both the regional covariation of CBF MRI and the covariation of structural MRI, in adolescents with and without bipolar disorder. Bipolar disorder is a disease with increased onset during adolescence, putative vascular underpinnings, and evidence of anomalous CBF and brain structure. In both groups, through hierarchical clustering, we found CBF covariance was principally described by clusters of regions circumscribed to the left hemisphere, right hemisphere, and the inferior brain; these clusters were spatially reminiscent of cerebral vascular territories. CBF covariance was associated with structural covariance in both the healthy group (n = 56; r = 0.20, p < 0.0001) and in the bipolar disorder group (n = 68; r = 0.36, p < 0.0001), and this CBF-structure correspondence was higher in bipolar disorder ( p = 0.0028). There was lower CBF covariance in bipolar disorder compared to controls between the left angular gyrus and pre- and post-central gyri. Altogether, CBF covariance revealed distinct brain organization, had modest correspondence to structural covariance, and revealed evidence of differences in bipolar 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 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".