Cerebral Blood Flow and Mood in Adolescents With Bipolar Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Multiple prior studies have examined cerebral blood flow (CBF) in relation to mood states in adults with bipolar disorder (BD). This study examined CBF related to mood states in adolescents early in the course of BD, about which little is known. Method: The study recruited 155 adolescents (mean [SD] age = 17.23 [1.62] years), including 81 with BD (32 hypomanic/mixed, 25 depressed, 24 euthymic) and 74 healthy controls. CBF was ascertained using pseudocontinuous arterial spin labeling magnetic resonance imaging. Region-of-interest analysis (amygdala, anterior cingulate cortex, middle frontal gyrus) controlling for age, sex, and race was complemented by whole-brain voxel-wise analyses. Within-BD regression analysis using age and sex as covariates examined the association of mania and depression severity with CBF. Results: = .01). In corrected voxel-wise analyses, CBF in the euthymic BD group was significantly higher compared with healthy controls in temporal and precentral regions. Conclusion: The finding of elevated regional CBF in adolescents with euthymic BD diverges from prior findings of reduced regional CBF in adults with BD. Higher CBF in adolescents with euthymic BD may reflect a developmentally specific compensatory perfusion mechanism required to maintain euthymia. However, longitudinal studies are needed to understand the temporal association of CBF and mood state in adolescents with BD, ideally followed into adulthood. Diversity & Inclusion Statement: We worked to ensure sex and gender balance in the recruitment of human participants. We worked to ensure race, ethnic, and/or other types of diversity in the recruitment of human participants. We worked to ensure that the study questionnaires were prepared in an inclusive way. One or more of the authors of this paper self-identifies as a member of one or more historically underrepresented sexual and/or gender groups in science. We actively worked to promote sex and gender balance in our author group. We actively worked to promote inclusion of historically underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups in science in our author group. The author list of this paper includes contributors from the location and/or community where the research was conducted who participated in the data collection, design, analysis, and/or interpretation of the work.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".