Dimensional personality impairment is associated with disruptions in intrinsic intralimbic functional connectivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recently proposed alternative dimensional models of personality disorder (PD) place the severity of impairments in self and interpersonal functioning at the core of personality pathology. However, associations of these impairments with disturbances in social, cognitive, and affective brain networks remain uninvestigated. METHODS: The present study examined patterns of resting-state functional connectivity (rsFC) in a sample of 74 age- and sex-matched participants (45 inpatients with PD and 29 healthy controls). At a minimum, PD patients carried a diagnosis of borderline PD, although the majority of the sample had one or more additional PDs. rsFC patterns in the following networks were compared between groups and in association with dimensional personality impairments: default mode network (DMN)/core mentalization, frontolimbic, salience, and central executive. Further, the extent to which variation in rsFC was explained by levels of personality impairment as compared to typology-specific borderline PD symptom severity was explored. RESULTS: Relative to controls, the PD group showed disruptions in rsFC within the DMN/core mentalization and frontolimbic networks. Among PD patients, greater severity of dimensional self-interpersonal impairment was associated with stronger intralimbic rsFC. In contrast, severity of borderline PD-specific typology was not associated with any rsFC patterns. CONCLUSIONS: Disruptions in core mentalization and affective networks are present in PD. Higher intralimbic functional connectivity may underlie self-interpersonal personality impairment in PD regardless of diagnostic typology-specific PD symptoms, providing initial neurobiological evidence supporting alternative dimensional conceptualizations of personality pathology.
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".