MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293329440 · doi:10.1016/j.jad.2022.08.084

Associations of medication with subcortical morphology across the lifespan in OCD: Results from the international ENIGMA Consortium

2022· article· en· W4293329440 on OpenAlexafffund
Iliyan Ivanov, Premika S.W. Boedhoe, Yoshinari Abe, Pino Alonso, Stephanie H. Ameis, Paul Arnold, Srinivas Balachander, Justin T. Baker, Nerisa Banaj, Núria Bargalló, Marcelo C. Batistuzzo, Francesco Benedetti, Jan C. Beucke, Irene Bollettini, Silvia Brem, Brian P. Brennan, Jan K. Buitelaar, Rosa Calvo, Yuqi Cheng, Kang Ik K. Cho, Sara Dallaspezia, Damiaan Denys, Juliana Belo Diniz, Benjamin A. Ely, Jamie D. Feusner, Sónia Ferreira, Kate D. Fitzgerald, Martine Fontaine, Patricia Gruner, Gregory L. Hanna, Yoshiyuki Hirano, Marcelo Q. Hoexter, Chaim Huyser, Keisuke Ikari, Anthony James, Fern Jaspers‐Fayer, Hongyan Jiang, Norbert Kathmann, Christian Kaufmann, Kathrin Koch, Jun Soo Kwon, Luisa Lázaro, Yanni Liu, Christine Löchner, Rachel Marsh, Ignacio Martínez‐Zalacaín, David Mataix‐Cols, José M. Menchón, Luciano Minuzzi, Ástrid Morer, Pedro Morgado, Akiko Nakagawa, Takashi Nakamae, Tomohiro Nakao, Janardhanan C. Narayanaswamy, Erika L. Nurmi, Sanghoon Oh, Chris Perriello, John Piacentini, Maria Picó‐Pérez, Fabrizio Piras, Federica Piras, Y.C. Janardhan Reddy, Daniela Rodriguez Manrique, Yuki Sakai, Eiji Shimizu, H. Blair Simpson, Noam Soreni, Carles Soriano‐Mas, Gianfranco Spalletta, Emily Stern, Michael C. Stevens, S. Evelyn Stewart, Philip R. Szeszko, David F. Tolin, Daan van Rooij, Dick J. Veltman, Ysbrand D. van der Werf, Guido van Wingen, Ganesan Venkatasubramanian, Susanne Walitza, Zhen Wang, Anri Watanabe, Lidewij H. Wolters, Xiufeng Xu, Je‐Yeon Yun, Mojtaba Zarei, Fengrui Zhang, Qing Zhao, Neda Jahanshad, Sophia I. Thomopoulos, Paul M. Thompson, Dan J. Stein, Odile A. van den Heuvel, Joseph O’Neill

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Affective Disorders · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonBC Mental Health & Substance Use ServicesUniversity of CalgaryBC Children's HospitalUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersNational Institute on Drug AbuseNational Institute of Mental HealthJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesMedical Research CouncilNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta InnovatesLundbeckfondenInternational OCD FoundationMichael Smith Health Research BCMinistero della SaluteDepartment of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, IndiaGeneralitat de CatalunyaEuropean Regional Development FundBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungNational Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and DepressionZonMwAgència de Gestió d'Ajuts Universitaris i de RecercaFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São PauloNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaDepartment of Biotechnology, Ministry of Science and Technology, IndiaSouth African Medical Research CouncilThe Wellcome Trust DBT India AllianceJapan Agency for Medical Research and DevelopmentDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftInstituto de Salud Carlos IIINational Research FoundationWellcome Trust
KeywordsPutamenAtrophyPsychologyMedicineBrain morphometryInternal medicinePsychiatryNeurosciencePediatricsMagnetic resonance imaging

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.003
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.302 · 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

Citations19
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Affective DisordersSame topicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersFrench-language works237,207