MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313339906 · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhac486

Functional alteration due to structural damage is network dependent: insight from multiple sclerosis

2022· article· en· W4313339906 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Alexander Bartnik, Tom Fuchs, Kira Ashton, Amy Kuceyeski, Xian Li, Matthew Mallory, Devon Oship, Niels Bergsland, Deepa P. Ramasamy, Dejan Jakimovski, Ralph H. B. Benedict, Bianca Weinstock‐Guttman, Robert Zivadinov, Michael G. Dwyer

Bibliographic record

VenueCerebral Cortex · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesEMD SeronoMallinckrodt PharmaceuticalsNational Institutes of HealthBoston Scientific CorporationGenentechBayerCelgeneSanofiBiogenBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsDefault mode networkStructural plasticityMultiple sclerosisNeuroscienceConnectomeDiffusion imagingDiffusion MRIResting state fMRIBrain damageStructural integrityPsychologyMedicineFunctional magnetic resonance imagingFunctional connectivityMagnetic resonance imagingImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Little is known about how the brain's functional organization changes over time with respect to structural damage. Using multiple sclerosis as a model of structural damage, we assessed how much functional connectivity (FC) changed within and between preselected resting-state networks (RSNs) in 122 subjects (72 with multiple sclerosis and 50 healthy controls). We acquired the structural, diffusion, and functional MRI to compute functional connectomes and structural disconnectivity profiles. Change in FC was calculated by comparing each multiple sclerosis participant's pairwise FC to controls, while structural disruption (SD) was computed from abnormalities in diffusion MRI via the Network Modification tool. We used an ordinary least squares regression to predict the change in FC from SD for 9 common RSNs. We found clear differences in how RSNs functionally respond to structural damage, namely that higher-order networks were more likely to experience changes in FC in response to structural damage (default mode R2 = 0.160-0.207, P < 0.001) than lower-order sensory networks (visual network 1 R2 = 0.001-0.007, P = 0.157-0.387). Our findings suggest that functional adaptability to structural damage depends on how involved the affected network is in higher-order processing.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.827
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCerebral CortexSame topicFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesFrench-language works237,207