Examining resting-state network connectivity in children exposed to perinatal maternal adversity using anatomically weighted functional connectivity (awFC) analyses; A preliminary report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Environmental perturbations during critical periods can have pervasive, organizational effects on neurodevelopment. To date, the literature examining the long-term impact of early life adversity has largely investigated structural and functional imaging data outcomes independently. However, emerging research points to a relationship between functional connectivity and the brain's underlying structural architecture. For instance, functional connectivity can be mediated by the presence of direct or indirect anatomical pathways. Such evidence warrants the use of structural and functional imaging in tandem to study network maturation. Accordingly, this study examines the impact of poor maternal mental health and socioeconomic context during the perinatal period on network connectivity in middle childhood using an anatomically weighted functional connectivity (awFC) approach. awFC is a statistical model that identifies neural networks by incorporating information from both structural and functional imaging data. Methods: Resting-state fMRI and DTI scans were acquired from children aged 7-9 years old. Results: Our results indicate that maternal adversity during the perinatal period can affect offspring's resting-state network connectivity during middle childhood. Specifically, in comparison to controls, children of mothers who had poor perinatal maternal mental health and/or low socioeconomic status exhibited greater awFC in the ventral attention network. Discussion: These group differences were discussed in terms of the role this network plays in attention processing and maturational changes that may accompany the consolidation of a more adult-like functional cortical organization. Furthermore, our results suggest that there is value in using an awFC approach as it may be more sensitive in highlighting connectivity differences in developmental networks associated with higher-order cognitive and emotional processing, as compared to stand-alone FC or SC analyses.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".