Resting state functional connectivity as a predictor of brief intervention response in adults with alcohol use disorder: A preliminary study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Brief interventions for alcohol use disorder (AUD) are generally efficacious, albeit with variability in response. Resting state functional connectivity (rsFC) may characterize neurobiological indicators that predict the response to brief interventions and is the focus of the current investigation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-six individuals with AUD (65.2% female) completed a resting state functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scan immediately followed by a brief intervention aimed at reducing alcohol consumption. Positive clinical response was defined as a reduction in alcohol consumption by at least one World Health Organization (WHO) risk drinking level at 3-month follow-up. rsFC was analyzed using seed-to-voxel analysis with seed regions from four networks: salience network, reward network, frontoparietal network, and default mode network. RESULTS: At baseline, responders had greater rsFC between the following seed regions in relation to voxel-based clusters than non-responders: (i) anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) in relation to left postcentral gyrus and right supramarginal gyrus (salience network); (ii) right posterior parietal cortex in relation to right ventral ACC (salience network); (iii) right interior frontal gyrus (IFG) pars opercularis in relation to right cerebellum and right occipital fusiform gyrus (frontoparietal); and (iv) right primary motor cortex in relation to left thalamus (default mode). Lower rsFC in responders vs. nonresponders was seen between the (i) right rostral prefrontal cortex in relation to left IFG pars triangularis (frontoparietal); (ii) right IFG pars triangularis in relation to right cerebellum (frontoparietal); (iii) right IFG pars triangularis in relation to right frontal eye fields and right angular gyrus (frontoparietal); and (iv) right nucleus accumbens in relation to right orbital frontal cortex and right insula (reward). CONCLUSIONS: Resting state functional connectivity in the frontoparietal, salience, and reward networks predicts the response to a brief intervention in individuals with AUD and could reflect greater receptivity or motivation for behavior change.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".