MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

New Research Perspectives on the Interplay Between Genes and Environment on Executive Function Development

2023· review· en· W4316655668 on OpenAlexafffund
Patrícia Maidana Miguel, Michael J. Meaney, Patrícia Pelufo Silveira

Bibliographic record

VenueBiological Psychiatry · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCognitive Abilities and Testing
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University InstituteMcGill University Health Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchLudmer Centre for Neuroinformatics and Mental HealthHarvard UniversityHope for Depression Research Foundation
KeywordsCognitive flexibilityPsychologyCognitionDevelopmental psychologyExecutive functionsAffect (linguistics)Flexibility (engineering)Working memoryCognitive psychologySet (abstract data type)Neuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Executive functions (EFs) are a set of skills responsible for the cognitive control of emotional states and behavior as well as for information processing required for learning and memory. Impairments in these abilities, such as focused attention, working memory, cognitive flexibility, and self-regulation, are implicated in a variety of psychopathologies across the lifespan. EF development shows a protracted course that begins in early childhood and continues throughout adolescence and into early adulthood. Maturation of EFs is subject to environmental influences such that adversity during development can affect multiple EF-mediated processes and outcomes. In this review, we describe sensitive periods for the development of EFs and the effects of adverse environmental exposures, with consideration of the underlying neurobiological mechanisms. However, there is considerable interindividual variation in the impact of adversity, with some individuals more vulnerable and some more resilient to its effects. We explore the evidence for the genetic contribution to interindividual variation in EFs, providing an overview of classic studies, followed by the results of recent genome-wide association studies and innovative genomic methods. Finally, we review studies investigating the interdependence between early-life adversities and genetic factors on EFs. We discuss the importance of novel functional genomics approaches, multilevel analyses, and big data to elucidate the complexity of the relationships between genes, environment, and the development of EFs.

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 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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.309
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.141 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations24
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiological PsychiatrySame topicCognitive Abilities and TestingFrench-language works237,207