Cortical grey matter volume differences in children with developmental coordination disorder compared to typically developing children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The cause of Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCD) is unknown, but neuroimaging evidence suggests that DCD may be related to altered brain development. Children with DCD show less structural and functional connectivity compared to typically developing (TD) children, but few studies have examined cortical volume in children with DCD. The purpose of this study was to investigate cortical grey matter volume using voxel-based morphometry (VBM) in children with DCD compared to TD children. Methods: This cross-sectional study was part of a larger randomized-controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02597751) that involved various MRI scans of children with/without DCD. This paper focuses on the anatomical scans, performing VBM of cortical grey matter volume in 30 children with DCD and 12 TD children. Preprocessing and VBM data analysis were conducted using the Computational Anatomy Tool Box-12 and a study-specific brain template. Differences between DCD and TD groups were assessed using a one-way ANOVA, controlling for total intracranial volume. Regression analyses examined if motor and/or attentional difficulties predicted grey matter volume. We used threshold-free cluster enhancement (5,000 permutations) and set an alpha level of 0.05. Due to the small sample size, we did not correct for multiple comparisons. Results: Compared to the TD group, children with DCD had significantly greater grey matter in the left superior frontal gyrus. Lower motor scores (meaning greater impairment) were related to greater grey matter volume in left superior frontal gyrus, frontal pole, and right middle frontal gyrus. Greater grey matter volume was also significantly correlated with higher scores on the Conners 3 ADHD Index in the left superior frontal gyrus, superior parietal lobe, and precuneus. These results indicate that greater grey matter volume in these regions is associated with poorer motor and attentional skills. Discussion: Greater grey matter volume in the left superior frontal gyrus in children with DCD may be a result of delayed or absent healthy cortical thinning, potentially due to altered synaptic pruning as seen in other neurodevelopmental disorders. These findings provide further support for the hypothesis that DCD is related to altered brain development.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".