Accelerated brain aging predicts impulsivity and symptom severity in depression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multiple structural and functional neuroimaging measures vary over the course of the lifespan and can be used to predict chronological age. Accelerated brain aging, as quantified by deviations in the MRI-based predicted age with respect to chronological age, is associated with risk for neurodegenerative conditions, bipolar disorder, and mortality. Whether age-related changes in resting-state functional connectivity are accelerated in major depressive disorder (MDD) is unknown, and, if so, it is unclear if these changes contribute to specific cognitive weaknesses that often occur in MDD. Here, we delineated age-related functional connectivity changes in a large sample of normal control subjects and tested whether brain aging is accelerated in MDD. Furthermore, we tested whether accelerated brain aging predicts individual differences in cognitive function. We trained a support vector regression model predicting age using resting-state functional connectivity in 710 healthy adults aged 18-89. We applied this model trained on normal aging subjects to a sample of actively depressed MDD participants (n = 109). The difference between predicted brain age and chronological age was 2.11 years greater (p = 0.015) in MDD patients compared to control participants. An older MDD brain age was significantly associated with increased impulsivity and, in males, increased depressive severity. Unexpectedly, accelerated brain aging was also associated with increased placebo response in a sham-controlled trial of high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation targeting the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex. Our results indicate that MDD is associated with accelerated brain aging, and that accelerated aging is selectively associated with greater impulsivity and depression severity.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".