Brain structural covariance network features are robust markers of early heavy alcohol use
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Recently, we demonstrated that a distinct pattern of structural covariance networks (SCN) from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-derived measurements of brain cortical thickness characterized young adults with alcohol use disorder (AUD) and predicted current and future problematic drinking in adolescents relative to controls. Here, we establish the robustness and value of SCN for identifying heavy alcohol users in three additional independent studies. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-sectional and longitudinal studies using data from the Pediatric Imaging, Neurocognition and Genetics (PING) study (n = 400, age range = 14-22 years), the National Consortium on Alcohol and Neurodevelopment in Adolescence (NCANDA) (n = 272, age range = 17-22 years) and the Human Connectome Project (HCP) (n = 375, age range = 22-37 years). CASES: Cases were defined based on heavy alcohol use patterns or former alcohol use disorder (AUD) diagnoses: 50, 68 and 61 cases were identified. Controls had none or low alcohol use or absence of AUD: 350, 204 and 314 controls were selected. MEASUREMENTS: Graph theory metrics of segregation and integration were used to summarize SCN. FINDINGS: Mirroring our prior findings, and across the three data sets, cases had a lower clustering coefficient [area under the curve (AUC) = -0.029, P = 0.002], lower modularity (AUC = -0.14, P = 0.004), lower average shortest path length (AUC = -0.078, P = 0.017) and higher global efficiency (AUC = 0.007, P = 0.010). Local efficiency differences were marginal (AUC = -0.017, P = 0.052). That is, cases exhibited lower network segregation and higher integration, suggesting that adjacent nodes (i.e. brain regions) were less similar in thickness whereas spatially distant nodes were more similar. CONCLUSION: Structural covariance network (SCN) differences in the brain appear to constitute an early marker of heavy alcohol use in three new data sets and, more generally, demonstrate the utility of SCN-derived metrics to detect brain-related psychopathology.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".