Intracranial neurophysiological correlates of rumination: A cross-sectional observational study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rumination is a transdiagnostic psychological process that plays a prominent role in many common psychiatric disorders, albeit its neurophysiological basis remains elusive. Existing neuroimaging studies have highlighted the precuneus and hippocampus as two pivotal brain regions in rumination’s neural underpinnings. Here, we examined the intracranial electroencephalogram (iEEG) recordings from 21 patients with epilepsy during a naturalistic, continuous, active rumination state and measured the low frequency (1–8 Hz) and high gamma (70–150 Hz) band oscillation powers. We observed enhanced low-frequency power in the precuneus and reduced high gamma power in the hippocampus during the rumination condition compared to the control condition. The hippocampal high gamma power reduction was associated with the self-reported reflection tendency. Our findings provided empirical evidence of the neurophysiological underpinnings of rumination and implicated a precuneus-hippocampus coupling across neural oscillation bands during an active rumination state.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".