High-effect gene-coding variants impact cognition, mental well-being, and neighborhood safety substrates in brain morphology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our genetic makeup, together with environmental and social influences, shape our brain's development. Yet, the imaging genetics field has struggled to integrate all these modalities to investigate the interplay between genetic blueprint, environment, human health, daily living skills and outcomes. Hence, we interrogated the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) cohort to outline the effects of rare high-effect genetic variants on brain architecture and corresponding implications on cognitive, behavioral, psychosocial, and socioeconomic traits. Specifically, we designed a holistic pattern-learning algorithm that quantitatively dissects the impacts of copy number variations (CNVs) on brain structure and 962 behavioral variables spanning 20 categories in 7,657 adolescents. Our results reveal associations between genetic alterations, higher-order brain networks, and specific parameters of the family well-being (increased parental and child stress, anxiety and depression) or neighborhood dynamics (decreased safety); effects extending beyond the impairment of cognitive ability or language capacity, dominantly reported in the CNV literature. Our investigation thus spotlights a far-reaching interplay between genetic variation and subjective life quality in adolescents and their families.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".