Robust Brain Correlates of Cognitive Performance in Psychosis and Its Prodrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Neurocognitive impairment is a well-known phenomenon in schizophrenia that begins prior to psychosis onset. Connectome-wide association studies have inconsistently linked cognitive performance to resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging. We hypothesized that a carefully selected cognitive instrument and refined population would allow identification of reliable brain-behavior associations with connectome-wide association studies. To test this hypothesis, we first identified brain-cognition correlations via a connectome-wide association study in early psychosis. We then asked, in an independent dataset, if these brain-cognition relationships would generalize to individuals who develop psychosis in the future. METHODS: The Seidman Auditory Continuous Performance Task (ACPT) effectively differentiates healthy participants from those with psychosis. Our connectome-wide association study used the HCP-EP (Human Connectome Project for Early Psychosis) (n = 183) to identify links between connectivity and ACPT performance. We then analyzed data from the NAPLS2 (North American Prodrome Longitudinal Study 2) (n = 345), a multisite prospective study of individuals at risk for psychosis. We tested the connectome-wide association study-identified cognition-connectivity relationship in both individuals at risk for psychosis and control participants. RESULTS: Our connectome-wide association study in early-course psychosis identified robust associations between better ACPT performance and higher prefrontal-somatomotor connectivity (p < .005). Prefrontal-somatomotor connectivity was also related to ACPT performance in at-risk individuals who would develop psychosis (n = 17). This finding was not observed in nonconverters (n = 196) or control participants (n = 132). CONCLUSIONS: This connectome-wide association study identified reproducible links between connectivity and cognition in separate samples of individuals with psychosis and at-risk individuals who would later develop psychosis. A carefully selected task and population improves the ability of connectome-wide association studies to identify reliable brain-phenotype relationships.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".