Frontostriatal salience network expansion in individuals in depression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Decades of neuroimaging studies have shown modest differences in brain structure and connectivity in depression, hindering mechanistic insights or the identification of risk factors for disease onset1. Furthermore, whereas depression is episodic, few longitudinal neuroimaging studies exist, limiting understanding of mechanisms that drive mood-state transitions. The emerging field of precision functional mapping has used densely sampled longitudinal neuroimaging data to show behaviourally meaningful differences in brain network topography and connectivity between and in healthy individuals2–4, but this approach has not been applied in depression. Here, using precision functional mapping and several samples of deeply sampled individuals, we found that the frontostriatal salience network is expanded nearly twofold in the cortex of most individuals with depression. This effect was replicable in several samples and caused primarily by network border shifts, with three distinct modes of encroachment occurring in different individuals. Salience network expansion was stable over time, unaffected by mood state and detectable in children before the onset of depression later in adolescence. Longitudinal analyses of individuals scanned up to 62 times over 1.5 years identified connectivity changes in frontostriatal circuits that tracked fluctuations in specific symptoms and predicted future anhedonia symptoms. Together, these findings identify a trait-like brain network topology that may confer risk for depression and mood-state-dependent connectivity changes in frontostriatal circuits that predict the emergence and remission of depressive symptoms over time. Precision functional mapping shows that the frontostriatal salience network occupies nearly twice as much of the cortex in people with depression, and this was unaffected by mood changes and detected in children before onset of symptoms.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".