An fMRI study of cognitive planning before and after symptom provocation in pediatric obsessive–compulsive disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Pediatric obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD) has been associated with poorer planning in laboratory, school and home settings. It is unclear whether this impairment is a standalone cognitive issue or the result of OCD symptoms. No study has examined the influence of provoked distress on planning performance and neural correlates in pediatric OCD. Methods: Before and after a symptom provocation task, youth with OCD ( n = 23; 9 boys; mean age ± standard deviation 15.1 ± 2.6 years) and matched healthy controls ( n = 23) completed the Tower of London task during functional MRI scanning. Results: During planning, participants with OCD recruited the left superior frontal gyrus to a greater extent than healthy controls after symptom provocation (group × time point interaction; t44 = 5.22, p < 0.001). In a seeded, region of interest–constrained, functional connectivity analysis, we identified greater connectivity between the left superior frontal gyrus and the right middle frontal gyrus, left precuneus and left inferior parietal lobule in participants with OCD than healthy controls. We also identified greater connectivity between the right amygdala and right medial frontal gyrus in patients with OCD than healthy controls, but only before symptom provocation. Limitations: The fixed-order design of the study and the number of participants taking medication ( n = 20) should be noted. Conclusion: Participants with OCD demonstrated greater amygdalar–cortical connectivity before symptom provocation, while sustaining greater recruitment and connectivity of task-related planning areas throughout the task. These results suggest that brain activity and connectivity is altered after symptom provocation, in the absence of impaired planning performance.
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".