The Developmental Brain Age Is Associated With Adversity, Depression, and Functional Outcomes Among Adolescents
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Most psychiatric disorders emerge in the second decade of life. In the present study, we examined whether environmental adversity, developmental antecedents, major depressive disorder, and functional impairment correlate with deviation from normative brain development in adolescence. METHODS: We trained a brain age prediction model using 189 structural magnetic resonance imaging brain features in 1299 typically developing adolescents (age range 9-19 years, mean = 13.5, SD = 3.04), validated the model in a holdout set of 322 adolescents (mean = 13.5, SD = 3.07), and used it to predict age in an independent risk-enriched cohort of 150 adolescents (mean = 13.6, SD = 2.82). We tested associations between the brain age gap and adversity, early antecedents, depression, and functional impairment. RESULTS: We accurately predicted chronological age in typically developing adolescents (mean absolute error = 1.53 years). The model generalized to the validation set (mean absolute error = 1.55 years, 1.98 bias adjusted) and to the independent at-risk sample (mean absolute error = 1.49 years, 1.86 bias adjusted). The brain age estimate was reliable in repeated scans (intraclass correlation = 0.94). Experience of environmental adversity (β = 0.18; 95% CI, 0.04 to 0.31; p = .02), diagnosis of major depressive disorder (β = 0.61; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.99; p = .01), and functional impairment (β = 0.16; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.27; p = .01) were associated with a positive brain age gap. CONCLUSIONS: Risk factors, diagnosis, and impact of mental illness are associated with an older-appearing brain during development.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it