The thalamus and its subnuclei—a gateway to obsessive-compulsive disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Larger thalamic volume has been found in children with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) and children with clinical-level symptoms within the general population. Particular thalamic subregions may drive these differences. The ENIGMA-OCD working group conducted mega- and meta-analyses to study thalamic subregional volume in OCD across the lifespan. Structural T1-weighted brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans from 2649 OCD patients and 2774 healthy controls across 29 sites (50 datasets) were processed using the FreeSurfer built-in ThalamicNuclei pipeline to extract five thalamic subregions. Volume measures were harmonized for site effects using ComBat before running separate multiple linear regression models for children, adolescents, and adults to estimate volumetric group differences. All analyses were pre-registered ( https://osf.io/73dvy ) and adjusted for age, sex and intracranial volume. Unmedicated pediatric OCD patients (<12 years) had larger lateral (d = 0.46), pulvinar (d = 0.33), ventral (d = 0.35) and whole thalamus (d = 0.40) volumes at unadjusted p-values <0.05. Adolescent patients showed no volumetric differences. Adult OCD patients compared with controls had smaller volumes across all subregions (anterior, lateral, pulvinar, medial, and ventral) and smaller whole thalamic volume (d = −0.15 to −0.07) after multiple comparisons correction, mostly driven by medicated patients and associated with symptom severity. The anterior thalamus was also significantly smaller in patients after adjusting for thalamus size. Our results suggest that OCD-related thalamic volume differences are global and not driven by particular subregions and that the direction of effects are driven by both age and medication status.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".