The bidirectional effects between cognitive ability and brain morphology: A life course Mendelian randomization analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Little is understood about the dynamic interplay between brain morphology and cognitive ability across the life course. Additionally, most existing research has focused on global morphology measures such as estimated total intracranial volume, mean thickness, and total surface area. Methods: Mendelian randomization was used to estimate the bidirectional effects between cognitive ability, global and regional measures of cortical thickness and surface area, estimated total intracranial volume, total white matter, and the volume of subcortical structures (N=37,864). Analyses were stratified for developmental periods (childhood, early adulthood, mid-to-late adulthood; age range: 8-81 years). Results: The earliest effects were observed in childhood and early adulthood in the frontoparietal lobes. A bidirectional relationship was identified between higher cognitive ability, larger estimated total intracranial volume (childhood, mid-to-late adulthood) and total surface area (all life stages). A thicker posterior cingulate cortex and a larger surface area in the caudal middle frontal cortex and temporal pole were associated with greater cognitive ability. Contrary, a thicker temporal pole was associated with lower cognitive ability. Discussion: Stable effects of cognitive ability on brain morphology across the life course suggests that childhood is potentially an important window for intervention.
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 | 0.055 | 0.072 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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.
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".