Large‐scale analysis of structural brain asymmetries during neurodevelopment: Associations with age and sex in 4265 children and adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Only a small number of studies have assessed structural differences between the two hemispheres during childhood and adolescence. However, the existing findings lack consistency or are restricted to a particular brain region, a specific brain feature, or a relatively narrow age range. Here, we investigated associations between brain asymmetry and age as well as sex in one of the largest pediatric samples to date (n = 4265), aged 1-18 years, scanned at 69 sites participating in the ENIGMA (Enhancing NeuroImaging Genetics through Meta-Analysis) consortium. Our study revealed that significant brain asymmetries already exist in childhood, but their magnitude and direction depend on the brain region examined and the morphometric measurement used (cortical volume or thickness, regional surface area, or subcortical volume). With respect to effects of age, some asymmetries became weaker over time while others became stronger; sometimes they even reversed direction. With respect to sex differences, the total number of regions exhibiting significant asymmetries was larger in females than in males, while the total number of measurements indicating significant asymmetries was larger in males (as we obtained more than one measurement per cortical region). The magnitude of the significant asymmetries was also greater in males. However, effect sizes for both age effects and sex differences were small. Taken together, these findings suggest that cerebral asymmetries are an inherent organizational pattern of the brain that manifests early in life. Overall, brain asymmetry appears to be relatively stable throughout childhood and adolescence, with some differential effects in males and females.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".