Brain functional changes in individuals with bulimia nervosa: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Bulimia nervosa (BN) is a disorder with high health and socioeconomic burdens that typically arises in late adolescence and early adulthood. Previous neuroimaging studies have found functional brain changes in patients with BN. This study aims to review the latest neurobiological evidence from studies of individuals with BN, examine the consistency of these findings and evaluate the food addiction hypothesis of the disease. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A systematic search will be performed using the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase and Web of Science databases, covering the period from database inception to 30 November 2021. Two researchers will be responsible for study selection, quality assessment and data extraction. The anisotropic effect size version of the signed differential mapping method will be used to conduct a coordinate-based meta-analysis. Publication bias will be examined with the Egger test. The quality of studies will be evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethics approval is required for this is a systematic review protocol and does not require the collection of primary data. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journal or related conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022307233.
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 | 0.074 | 0.109 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.021 | 0.027 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.048 | 0.004 |
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".