Functional Connectivity within the Frontal–Striatal Network Differentiates Checkers from Washers of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is a psychiatric disorder with high clinical heterogeneity manifested by the presence of obsessions and/or compulsions. The classification of the symptom dimensional subtypes is helpful for further exploration of the pathophysiological mechanisms underlying the clinical heterogeneity of OCD. Washing and checking symptoms are the two major symptom subtypes in OCD, but the neural mechanisms of the different types of symptoms are not yet clearly understood. The purpose of this study was to compare regional and network functional alterations between washing and checking OCD based on resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rs-fMRI). METHODS: In total, 90 subjects were included, including 15 patients in the washing group, 30 patients in the checking group, and 45 healthy controls (HCs). Regional homogeneity (ReHo) was used to compare the differences in regional spontaneous neural activity among the three groups, and local indicators were analyzed by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves as imaging markers for the prediction of the clinical subtypes of OCD. Furthermore, differently activated local brain areas, as regions of interest (ROIs), were used to explore differences in altered brain functioning between washing and checking OCD symptoms based on a functional connectivity (FC) analysis. RESULTS: Extensive abnormalities in spontaneous brain activity involving frontal, temporal, and occipital regions were observed in the patients compared to the HCs. The differences in local brain functioning between checking and washing OCD were mainly concentrated in the bilateral middle frontal gyrus, right supramarginal gyrus, right angular gyrus, and right inferior occipital gyrus. The ROC curve analysis revealed that the hyperactivation right middle frontal gyrus had a better discriminatory value for checking and washing OCD. Furthermore, the seed-based FC analysis revealed higher FC between the left medial superior frontal gyrus and right caudate nucleus compared to that in the healthy controls. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that extensive local differences exist in intrinsic spontaneous activity among the checking group, washing group, and HCs. The neural basis of checking OCD may be related to dysfunction in the frontal-striatal network, which distinguishes OCD from washing OCD.
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".