MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3135171635 · doi:10.1093/brain/awab096

Dissecting autism and schizophrenia through neuroimaging genomics

2021· review· en· W3135171635 on OpenAlexafffund
Clara Moreau, Armin Raznahan, Pierre Bellec, M. Mallar Chakravarty, Paul M. Thompson, Sébastien Jacquemont

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities
Canadian institutionsDouglas Mental Health University InstituteUniversité de MontréalInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada First Research Excellence Fund
KeywordsNeuroimagingSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)AutismGenomicsNeurosciencePsychologyAutism spectrum disorderGenetic architecturePsychiatryMedicinePhenotypeGeneticsBiologyGenome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neuroimaging genomic studies of autism spectrum disorder and schizophrenia have mainly adopted a 'top-down' approach, beginning with the behavioural diagnosis, and moving down to intermediate brain phenotypes and underlying genetic factors. Advances in imaging and genomics have been successfully applied to increasingly large case-control studies. As opposed to diagnostic-first approaches, the bottom-up strategy begins at the level of molecular factors enabling the study of mechanisms related to biological risk, irrespective of diagnoses or clinical manifestations. The latter strategy has emerged from questions raised by top-down studies: why are mutations and brain phenotypes over-represented in individuals with a psychiatric diagnosis? Are they related to core symptoms of the disease or to comorbidities? Why are mutations and brain phenotypes associated with several psychiatric diagnoses? Do they impact a single dimension contributing to all diagnoses? In this review, we aimed at summarizing imaging genomic findings in autism and schizophrenia as well as neuropsychiatric variants associated with these conditions. Top-down studies of autism and schizophrenia identified patterns of neuroimaging alterations with small effect-sizes and an extreme polygenic architecture. Genomic variants and neuroimaging patterns are shared across diagnostic categories suggesting pleiotropic mechanisms at the molecular and brain network levels. Although the field is gaining traction; characterizing increasingly reproducible results, it is unlikely that top-down approaches alone will be able to disentangle mechanisms involved in autism or schizophrenia. In stark contrast with top-down approaches, bottom-up studies showed that the effect-sizes of high-risk neuropsychiatric mutations are equally large for neuroimaging and behavioural traits. Low specificity has been perplexing with studies showing that broad classes of genomic variants affect a similar range of behavioural and cognitive dimensions, which may be consistent with the highly polygenic architecture of psychiatric conditions. The surprisingly discordant effect sizes observed between genetic and diagnostic first approaches underscore the necessity to decompose the heterogeneity hindering case-control studies in idiopathic conditions. We propose a systematic investigation across a broad spectrum of neuropsychiatric variants to identify putative latent dimensions underlying idiopathic conditions. Gene expression data on temporal, spatial and cell type organization in the brain have also considerable potential for parsing the mechanisms contributing to these dimensions' phenotypes. While large neuroimaging genomic datasets are now available in unselected populations, there is an urgent need for data on individuals with a range of psychiatric symptoms and high-risk genomic variants. Such efforts together with more standardized methods will improve mechanistically informed predictive modelling for diagnosis and clinical outcomes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations57
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrainSame topicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalitiesFrench-language works237,207