Altered Neural Activation in First Episode Psychosis Patients With Comorbid Conduct Disorder: A Pilot Investigation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective Most individuals with psychosis do not perpetrate violence. However, conduct disorder (CD) increases the risk of violence in psychotic conditions. Since it is currently unknown whether the neural correlates of first episode psychosis (FEP) differ when CD is present, we employed functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) during a Go/No-Go impulsivity paradigm to investigate. Based on previous research, we hypothesized that activation differences between FEP and FEP+CD would be found in the prefrontal cortex, cingulate cortex, and inferior parietal lobule. Method We scanned 51 male participants: 17 FEP, 16 FEP+CD, and 18 healthy controls with an average age of 24.2 years (17-34). Whole-brain images were analyzed via a general linear model, and first-level contrast images were created comparing successful No-Go > Go trials. Paired t-tests were conducted at the group level and included confound regressors for age, IQ, antipsychotic dose, psychotic symptoms, and framewise displacement. A voxel-based Z-score threshold of Z > 3.1 ( p < 0.001, uncorrected) and a cluster-level extent threshold of p <0.01, corrected, was considered significant. Results Successful response inhibition elicited hyperactivation in FEP+CD versus FEP in the cingulate gyrus; regions of the PFC, including right middle frontal gyrus (RMFG); bilateral inferior parietal lobule; temporal gyrus; and cerebellum ( p- values ranged from 1.11E-08 to 0.0031). There was no region where activation was greater in FEP > FEP+CD. Conclusion These preliminary results tentatively suggest that brain regions subserving response inhibition may be altered when CD is comorbid with FEP.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".