Connectivity patterns of the core resting-state networks associated with apathy in late-life depression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Apathy is associated with reduced antidepressant response and dementia in late-life depression (LLD). However, the functional cerebral basis of apathy is understudied in LLD. We investigated the functional connectivity of 5 resting-state networks (RSN) hypothesized to underlie apathy in LLD. METHODS: Resting-state functional MRI data were collected from individuals with LLD who did not have dementia as well as healthy older adults between October 2019 and April 2022. Apathy was evaluated using the diagnostic criteria for apathy (DCA), the Apathy Evaluation Scale (AES) and the Apathy Motivation Index (AMI). Subnetworks whose connectivity was significantly associated with each apathy measure were identified via the threshold-free network-based statistics. Regions that were consistently associated with apathy across the measures were reported as robust findings. RESULTS: Our sample included 39 individuals with LLD who did not have dementia and 26 healthy older adults. Compared with healthy controls, individuals with LLD had an altered intra-RSN and inter-RNS connectivity in the default mode, the cingulo-opercular and the frontoparietal networks. All 3 apathy measurements showed associations with modified intra-RSN connectivity in these networks, except for the DCA in the cingulo-opercular network. The AMI scores showed stronger associations with the cingulo-opercular and frontoparietal networks, whereas the AES had stronger associations with the default mode network and the goal-oriented behaviour network. LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by the small number of participants without apathy according to the DCA, which may have reduced the statistical power of between-group comparisons. Additionally, the reliance on specific apathy measures may have influenced the observed overlap in brain regions. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that apathy in LLD is consistently associated with changes in both intra-RSN and inter-RSN connectivity of brain regions implicated in goal-oriented behaviours. These results corroborate previous findings of altered functional RSN connectivity in severe LLD.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".