MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W89053356 · doi:10.1177/070674371405900602

Resting-State Neuroimaging Studies: A New Way of Identifying Differences and Similarities among the Anxiety Disorders?

2014· review· en· W89053356 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Andrew Peterson, Janine Thome, Paul Frewen, Ruth A. Lanius

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsNeuroimagingAnxietyPsychologyResting state fMRIClinical psychologyPsychiatryNeuroscienceCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This review examines recent functional neuroimaging research of resting-state regional connectivity between brain regions in anxiety disorders. Studies compiled in the PubMed- National Center for Biotechnology Information database targeting resting-state functional connectivity in anxiety disorders were reviewed. Diagnoses included posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), social anxiety disorder (SAD), obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), panic disorder (PD), and specific phobia (SP). Alterations to network connectivity were demonstrated in PTSD, GAD, SAD, OCD, and PD in several resting-state investigations. Differences from control subjects were primarily observed in the default mode network within PTSD, SAD, and OCD. Alterations within the salience network were observed primarily in PTSD, GAD, and SAD. Alterations in corticostriatal networks were uniquely observed in OCD. Finally, alterations within somatosensory networks were observed in SAD and PD investigations. Resting-state studies involving SPs as a primary diagnosis (with or without comorbidities) were not generated during the literature search. The emerging use of resting-state paradigms may be an effective method for understanding associations between anxiety disorders. Targeted studies of PD and SPs, meta-analyses of the studies conducted to date, and studies of the impact of specific comorbid presentations, are recommended future research directions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.793
Threshold uncertainty score0.894

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.091
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.230 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations164
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of PsychiatrySame topicFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesFrench-language works237,207