Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Based Analysis of Functional Connectivity in Chronic Stress: A Comparison of Stress-Induced and Recovery States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Chronic stress is associated with long-lasting alterations in brain function, particularly affecting the dynamic interactions between large-scale neural networks during stress and recovery. In this study, we compared changes in brain functional connectivity between states of stress induction and recovery in individuals with chronic stress and investigate the effects of chronic stress on functional brain networks. Methods: We used functional magnetic resonance imaging and ROI-to-ROI analysis to analyze functional connectivity in chronic stress (n = 36). The participants performed the Montreal Imaging Stress Task followed by a recovery phase. Results: The results showed that during the stress induction phase, connectivity between the salience and dorsal attention networks increased, demonstrating enhanced attention and emotional regulation. In contrast, during the recovery phase, connectivity between the default mode and the frontoparietal networks increased, demonstrating cognitive and emotional recovery after stress. Notably, we found that salience network activation continued during the recovery phase, suggesting that individuals with chronic stress may exhibit a continual state of alertness even after stress. Conclusions: Thus, our findings show that chronic stress can lead to the reconstruction of functional networks during the stress response and recovery, contributing to our understanding of the neurobiological correlates of stress-related impairment.
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".