Electroencephalographic Microstates are Correlated with Global Functioning in Schizophrenia But Not in Bipolar Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives. Microstate studies of electroencephalograms (EEGs) on schizophrenia (SCZ) and bipolar disorder (BD) demonstrated categorical differences. The relationship between microstate indices and clinical symptoms in each group, however, remained unclear. Our objective was to examine associations between EEG microstates and the core features of SCZ and BD. Methods. This study examined the resting EEG data of 40 patients with SCZ, 19 patients with BD (12 BD type I and 7 BD type II), and 16 healthy controls. EEG topographic maps were divided into four canonical microstate classes: A, B, C, and D. The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), Young Mania Rating Scale, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD), and Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) were used to measure clinical symptoms and global functioning. Results. There was a significant inverse correlation between the proportion of time spent in microstate class A and GAF in patients with SCZ but not BD. Furthermore, the occurrence of microstate class A was positively correlated with the Positive Scale scores of the PANSS. Nevertheless, there were no group differences between the microstate classes. Conclusions. The results of this study indicate a negative correlation between microstate class A and global functioning in SCZ but not in BD. The association may be mediated by positive symptoms of SZ. Neural mechanisms underlying this relationship require further investigation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".