MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4223900775 · doi:10.1002/hbm.25876

Associations of white matter hyperintensities with networks of gray matter blood flow and volume in midlife adults: A coronary artery risk development in young adults magnetic resonance imaging substudy

2022· article· en· W4223900775 on OpenAlexafffund
William S.H. Kim, Nicholas J. Luciw, Sarah Atwi, Zahra Shirzadi, Sudipto Dolui, John A. Detre, Ilya M. Nasrallah, Walter Swardfager, R. Nick Bryan, Lenore J. Launer, Bradley J. MacIntosh

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Brain Mapping · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsHeart and Stroke FoundationUniversity Health NetworkToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersNational Institute on AgingCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteBrain and Behavior Research Foundation
KeywordsBetweenness centralityWhite matterHyperintensityCardiologyCerebral blood flowPsychologyInternal medicineCovarianceMagnetic resonance imagingMedicineMathematicsCentralityStatisticsRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

White matter hyperintensities (WMHs) are emblematic of cerebral small vessel disease, yet effects on the brain have not been well characterized at midlife. Here, we investigated whether WMH volume is associated with brain network alterations in midlife adults. Two hundred and fifty-four participants from the Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults study were selected and stratified by WMH burden into Lo-WMH (mean age = 50 ± 3.5 years) and Hi-WMH (mean age = 51 ± 3.7 years) groups of equal size. We constructed group-level covariance networks based on cerebral blood flow (CBF) and gray matter volume (GMV) maps across 74 gray matter regions. Through consensus clustering, we found that both CBF and GMV covariance networks partitioned into modules that were largely consistent between groups. Next, CBF and GMV covariance network topologies were compared between Lo- and Hi-WMH groups at global (clustering coefficient, characteristic path length, global efficiency) and regional (degree, betweenness centrality, local efficiency) levels. At the global level, there were no between-group differences in either CBF or GMV covariance networks. In contrast, we found between-group differences in the regional degree, betweenness centrality, and local efficiency of several brain regions in both CBF and GMV covariance networks. Overall, CBF and GMV covariance analyses provide evidence that WMH-related network alterations are present at midlife.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.939

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.187 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Brain MappingSame topicFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesFrench-language works237,207