Brain-Charting Autism and Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Reveals Distinct and Overlapping Neurobiology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Autism and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are heterogeneous neurodevelopmental conditions with complex underlying neurobiology that is still poorly understood. Despite overlapping presentation and sex-biased prevalence, autism and ADHD are rarely studied together and sex differences are often overlooked. Population modeling, often referred to as normative modeling, provides a unified framework for studying age-specific and sex-specific divergences in brain development. METHODS: Here, we used population modeling and a large, multisite neuroimaging dataset (N = 4255 after quality control) to characterize cortical anatomy associated with autism and ADHD, benchmarked against models of average brain development based on a sample of more than 75,000 individuals. We also examined sex and age differences and relationship with autistic traits and explored the co-occurrence of autism and ADHD. RESULTS: We observed robust neuroanatomical signatures of both autism and ADHD. Overall, autistic individuals showed greater cortical thickness and volume that was localized to the superior temporal cortex, whereas individuals with ADHD showed more global increases in cortical thickness but lower cortical volume and surface area across much of the cortex. The co-occurring autism+ADHD group showed a unique pattern of widespread increases in cortical thickness and certain decreases in surface area. We also found that sex modulated the neuroanatomy of autism but not ADHD, and there was an age-by-diagnosis interaction for ADHD only. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate distinct cortical differences in autism and ADHD that are differentially affected by age and sex as well as potentially unique patterns related to their co-occurrence.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".