Cerebellar gamma‐aminobutyric acid: Investigation of group effects in neurodevelopmental disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs) including autism spectrum disorder (ASD), attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) are thought to arise in part from the disruption in the excitatory/inhibitory balance of gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) and glutamate in the brain. Recent evidence has shown the involvement of the cerebellum in cognition and affect regulation, and cerebellar atypical function or damage is reported frequently in NDDs. Magnetic resonance spectroscopy studies have reported decreases in GABA in cortical brain areas in the NDDs, however, GABA levels in the cerebellum have not been examined. To determine possible group effects, we used a MEGA-PRESS acquisition to investigate GABA+ levels in a cerebellar voxel in 343 individuals (aged 2.5-22 years) with ASD, ADHD, OCD and controls. Using a mixed effects model, we found no significant differences between groups in GABA+ concentration. Our findings suggest that cerebellar GABA+ levels do not differentiate NDD groups.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".