A Prospective Evaluation of Infant Cerebellar-Cerebral Functional Connectivity in Relation to Behavioral Development in Autism Spectrum Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder diagnosed based on social impairment, restricted interests, and repetitive behaviors. Contemporary theories posit that cerebellar pathology contributes causally to ASD by disrupting error-based learning (EBL) during infancy. The present study represents the first test of this theory in a prospective infant sample, with potential implications for ASD detection. Methods: 94, 68 male) were used to examine 6-month cerebellar functional connectivity magnetic resonance imaging in relation to later (12/24-month) ASD-associated behaviors and outcomes. Hypothesis-driven univariate analyses and machine learning-based predictive tests examined cerebellar-frontoparietal network (FPN; subserves error signaling in support of EBL) and cerebellar-default mode network (DMN; broadly implicated in ASD) connections. Cerebellar-FPN functional connectivity was used as a proxy for EBL, and cerebellar-DMN functional connectivity provided a comparative foil. Data-driven functional connectivity magnetic resonance imaging enrichment examined brain-wide behavioral associations, with post hoc tests of cerebellar connections. Results: Cerebellar-FPN and cerebellar-DMN connections did not demonstrate associations with ASD. Functional connectivity magnetic resonance imaging enrichment identified 6-month correlates of later ASD-associated behaviors in networks of a priori interest (FPN, DMN), as well as in cingulo-opercular (also implicated in error signaling) and medial visual networks. Post hoc tests did not suggest a role for cerebellar connections. Conclusions: We failed to identify cerebellar functional connectivity-based contributions to ASD. However, we observed prospective correlates of ASD-associated behaviors in networks that support EBL. Future studies may replicate and extend network-level positive results, and tests of the cerebellum may investigate brain-behavior associations at different developmental stages and/or using different neuroimaging modalities.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".