Neural Circuitry Engaged During Unsuccessful Motor Inhibition in Pediatric Bipolar Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Deficits in motor inhibition may contribute to impulsivity and irritability in children with bipolar disorder. Studies of the neural circuitry engaged during failed motor inhibition in pediatric bipolar disorder may increase our understanding of the pathophysiology of the illness. The authors tested the hypothesis that children with bipolar disorder and comparison subjects would differ in ventral prefrontal cortex, striatal, and anterior cingulate activation during unsuccessful motor inhibition. They also compared activation in medicated versus unmedicated children with bipolar disorder and in children with bipolar disorder and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) versus those with bipolar disorder without ADHD. Method: The authors conducted an event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging study comparing neural activation in children with bipolar disorder and healthy comparison subjects while they performed a motor inhibition task. The study group included 26 children with bipolar disorder (13 unmedicated and 15 with ADHD) and 17 comparison subjects matched by age, gender, and IQ. Results: On failed inhibitory trials, comparison subjects showed greater bilateral striatal and right ventral prefrontal cortex activation than did patients. These deficits were present in unmedicated patients, but the role of ADHD in mediating them was unclear. Conclusions: In relation to comparison subjects, children with bipolar disorder may have deficits in their ability to engage striatal structures and the right ventral prefrontal cortex during unsuccessful inhibition. Further research should ascertain the contribution of ADHD to these deficits and the role that such deficits may play in the emotional and behavioral dysregulation characteristic of bipolar disorder.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".