Language Network Dysfunction and Formal Thought Disorder in Schizophrenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pathophysiological inquiries into schizophrenia require a consideration of one of its most defining features: disorganization and impoverishment in verbal behavior. This feature, often captured using the term Formal Thought Disorder (FTD), still remains to be one of the most poorly understood and understudied dimensions of schizophrenia. In particular, the large-scale network level dysfunction that contributes to FTD remains obscure to date. STUDY DESIGN: In this narrative review, we consider the various challenges that need to be addressed for us to move towards mapping FTD (construct) to a brain network level account (circuit). STUDY RESULTS: The construct-to-circuit mapping goal is now becoming more plausible than it ever was, given the parallel advent of brain stimulation and the tools providing objective readouts of human speech. Notwithstanding this, several challenges remain to be overcome before we can decisively map the neural basis of FTD. We highlight the need for phenotype refinement, robust experimental designs, informed analytical choices, and present plausible targets in and beyond the Language Network for brain stimulation studies in FTD. CONCLUSIONS: Developing a therapeutically beneficial pathophysiological model of FTD is a challenging endeavor, but holds the promise of improving interpersonal communication and reducing social disability in schizophrenia. Addressing the issues raised in this review will be a decisive step in this direction.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".