MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3136414128 · doi:10.1093/braincomms/fcab026

Hippocampal atrophy is associated with psychotic symptom severity following traumatic brain injury

2021· article· en· W3136414128 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael J. C. Bray, Bhanu Sharma, Julia Cottrelle's, Matthew E. Peters, Mark Bayley, Robin Green

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain Communications · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Research ChairsPhysicians' Services Incorporated FoundationOntario Neurotrauma Foundation
KeywordsPsychosisTraumatic brain injuryPsychologySchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)SequelaPersonality changesHippocampal formationPsychiatryClinical psychologyAtrophyMedicinePersonalityInternal medicineNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Psychosis is a rare, but particularly serious sequela of traumatic brain injury. However, little is known as to the neurobiological processes that may contribute to its onset. Early evidence suggests that psychotic symptom development after traumatic brain injury may co-occur with hippocampal degeneration, invoking the possibility of a relationship. Particularly regarding the hippocampal head, these degenerative changes may lead to dysregulation in dopaminergic circuits, as is reported in psychoses due to schizophrenia, resulting in the positive symptom profile typically seen in post-injury psychosis. The objective of this study was to examine change in hippocampal volume and psychotic symptoms across time in a sample of moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury patients. We hypothesized that hippocampal volume loss would be associated with increased psychotic symptom severity. From a database of n = 137 adult patients with prospectively collected, longitudinal imaging and neuropsychiatric outcomes, n = 24 had complete data at time points of interest (5 and 12 months post-traumatic brain injury) and showed increasing psychotic symptom severity on the Personality Assessment Inventory psychotic experiences subscale of the schizophrenia clinical scale across time. Secondary analysis employing stepwise regression with hippocampal volume change (independent variable) and Personality Assessment Inventory psychotic symptom change (dependent variable) from 5 to 12 months post-injury was conducted including age, sex, marijuana use, family history of schizophrenia, years of education and injury severity as control variables. Total right hippocampal volume loss predicted an increase in the Personality Assessment Inventory psychotic experiences subscale (F(1, 22) = 5.396, adjusted R2 = 0.161, P = 0.030; β = −0.017, 95% confidence interval = −0.018, −0.016) as did volume of the right hippocampal head (F(1, 22) = 5.764, adjusted R2 = 0.172, P = 0.025; β = −0.019, 95% confidence interval = −0.021, −0.017). Final model goodness-of-fit was confirmed using k-fold (k = 5) cross-validation. Consistent with our hypotheses, the current findings suggest that hippocampal degeneration in the chronic stages of moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury may play a role in the delayed onset of psychotic symptoms after traumatic brain injury. These findings localized to the right hippocampal head are supportive of a proposed aetiological mechanism whereby atrophy of the hippocampal head may lead to the dysregulation of dopaminergic networks following traumatic brain injury; possibly accounting for observed clinical features of psychotic disorder after traumatic brain injury (including prolonged latency period to symptom onset and predominance of positive symptoms). If further validated, these findings may bear important clinical implications for neurorehabilitative therapies following traumatic brain injury.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.718
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain CommunicationsSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207