MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224528528 · doi:10.1016/j.jaac.2022.04.010

Cerebral Blood Flow and Core Mood Symptoms in Youth Bipolar Disorder: Evidence for Region–Symptom Specificity

2022· article· en· W4224528528 on OpenAlexafffund
Mikaela K. Dimick, Simina Toma, Bradley J. MacIntosh, Anahit Grigorian, Lisa Fıksenbaum, Eric A. Youngstrom, Andrew D. Robertson, Benjamin I. Goldstein

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science CentreCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchOntario Mental Health Foundation
KeywordsCerebral blood flowBipolar disorderMoodMedicinePsychiatryCore (optical fiber)Clinical psychologyPsychologyCardiologyMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective Building on prior findings in adults, this study investigated regional cerebral blood flow (CBF) in relation to DSM-5 criterion A symptoms of depression and mania in youth with bipolar disorder (BD). Method The study recruited 81 youths with BD and 75 healthy controls 13-20 years old. CBF was ascertained using pseudocontinuous arterial spin labeling magnetic resonance imaging. Region-of-interest analyses examined the amygdala, anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), middle frontal gyrus, and global gray matter CBF. The association of criterion A depression and mania symptoms with CBF was examined dimensionally in youth with BD in regression analyses with continuous symptom severity scores. Age and sex were included as covariates. False discovery rate (FDR) was used to correct for 28 tests (4 regions by 7 symptoms; α < .0017). CBF for BD and healthy control groups was compared to give context for findings. Results In youth with BD, depressed mood inversely correlated with ACC (β = −0.31, p uncorrected = .004, p FDR = .056) and global (β = −0.27, p uncorrected = .013, p FDR = .09) CBF. The same pattern was observed for anhedonia (ACC CBF: β = −0.33, p uncorrected = .004, p FDR = .056; global CBF: β = −0.29, p uncorrected = .008, p FDR = .07). There were no significant findings for manic symptoms or in BD vs healthy control contrasts. Conclusion The present findings, while not significant after correction for multiple testing, highlight the potential value of focusing on ACC in relation to depressed mood and anhedonia, and demonstrate that CBF is sensitive to depression symptom severity in youth. Lack of findings regarding manic symptoms may relate to the exclusion of fully manic participants in this outpatient sample.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations14
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent PsychiatrySame topicBipolar Disorder and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207