MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394677986 · doi:10.33588/rn.7806.2023221

Mapeo neuroanatómico de atención inhibitoria y memoria de trabajo con resonancia magnética funcional en niños sanos

2024· article· es· W4394677986 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rosaura Rosales-Fernández, N Sarce-Paredes, C Vásquez, F Alarcón-Garrido

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista de Neurología · 2024
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldPsychology
TopicDevelopmental and Educational Neuropsychology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorking memoryPsychologyHumanitiesNeuroscienceAudiologyMedicineCognitionArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The objective is to produce an average brain activation mapping template in healthy children using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), with specific paradigms for activating inhibitory attention and working memory functions. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A nutritional and neuropsychological evaluation was performed on 87 right-handed children. The inclusion criteria were met by 30 children (15 boys and 15 girls) between 9 and 11 years old, who were studied with fMRI in two inhibitory attention tests (Go/No Go), with food cues, a working memory test (Continuous Performance Test Identical Pairs) and measurement of anatomical volumes. These data were subsequently processed with the FSL-v5 program, with a threshold of p < 0.05 (cluster-wise). The brain areas activated were located using a standard Montreal Neurological Institute brain template and the Harvard-Oxford structural cortical atlas. RESULTS: The inhibitory attention tests showed activation frontal areas predominantly on the right, and the cingulate, parietal and occipital areas, with preponderance in occipital areas in the food cues test. In the Continuous Performance Test-Identical Pairs test, activation was obtained predominantly in the occipital, frontal and parietal areas. CONCLUSIONS: Brain activity mapping templates are obtained in healthy children with tests for inhibitory attention, food cues and working memory. The activation areas are mostly those reported in the literature. This provides baseline brain activation patterns for studying pathologies related to inhibitory attention, impulsivity and working memory.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista de NeurologíaSame topicDevelopmental and Educational NeuropsychologyFrench-language works237,207