Central Obesity-related Brain Alterations Predict Cognitive Impairments in First Episode of Psychosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS: Cognitive impairment is a key contributor to disability and poor outcomes in schizophrenia, yet it is not adequately addressed by currently available treatments. Thus, it is important to search for preventable or treatable risk factors for cognitive impairment. Here, we hypothesized that obesity-related neurostructural alterations will be associated with worse cognitive outcomes in people with first episode of psychosis (FEP). STUDY DESIGN: This observational study presents cross-sectional data from the Early-Stage Schizophrenia Outcome project. We acquired T1-weighted 3D MRI scans in 440 participants with FEP at the time of the first hospitalization and in 257 controls. Metabolic assessments included body mass index (BMI), waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), serum concentrations of triglycerides, cholesterol, glucose, insulin, and hs-CRP. We chose machine learning-derived brain age gap estimate (BrainAGE) as our measure of neurostructural changes and assessed attention, working memory and verbal learning using Digit Span and the Auditory Verbal Learning Test. STUDY RESULTS: Among obesity/metabolic markers, only WHR significantly predicted both, higher BrainAGE (t(281)=2.53, p=0.012) and worse verbal learning (t(290) = -2.51, P = .026). The association between FEP and verbal learning was partially mediated by BrainAGE (average causal mediated effects, ACME = -0.04 [-0.10, -0.01], P = .022) and the higher BrainAGE in FEP was partially mediated by higher WHR (ACME = 0.08 [0.02, 0.15], P = .006). CONCLUSIONS: Central obesity-related brain alterations were linked with worse cognitive performance already early in the course of psychosis. These structure-function links suggest that preventing or treating central obesity could target brain and cognitive impairments in FEP.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".