White matter microstructure, traumatic brain injury, and disruptive behavior disorders in girls and boys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Girls and boys presenting disruptive behavior disorders (DBDs) display differences in white matter microstructure (WMM) relative to typically developing (TD) sex-matched peers. Boys with DBDs are at increased risk for traumatic brain injuries (TBIs), which are also known to impact WMM. This study aimed to disentangle associations of WMM with DBDs and TBIs. Methods: The sample included 673 children with DBDs and 836 TD children, aged 9-10, from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study. Thirteen white matter bundles previously associated with DBDs were the focus of study. Analyses were undertaken separately by sex, adjusting for callous-unemotional traits (CU), attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), age, pubertal stage, IQ, ethnicity, and family income. Results: Among children without TBIs, those with DBDs showed sex-specific differences in WMM of several tracts relative to TD. Most differences were associated with ADHD, CU, or both. Greater proportions of girls and boys with DBDs than sex-matched TD children had sustained TBIs. Among girls and boys with DBDs, those who had sustained TBIs compared to those not injured, displayed WMM alterations that were robust to adjustment for all covariates. Across most DBD/TD comparisons, axonal density scores were higher among children presenting DBDs. Discussion: In conclusion, in this community sample of children, those with DBDs were more likely to have sustained TBIs that were associated with additional, sex-specific, alterations of WMM. These additional alterations further compromise the future development of children with DBDs.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".