<aside>
After preprocessing, we input the z-scores into SuStaIn. This page highlights three key points:
The plots below illustrate the reconstructed progression sequences of regional brain changes at the lobe level, derived using the SuStaIn model.
On the left, case participants (i.e., children exposed to GDM) are stratified into two distinct subtypes, each characterized by a different temporal ordering of affected lobes. The optimal number of subtypes was determined using cross-validation and information criteria.
On the right, the ordering derived from healthy controls is shown for comparison. Together, these visualizations highlight both the heterogeneity among exposed individuals and their divergence from the control trajectory
Subtype 1 ( n = 372, 65%): insula → occipital_lobe → parietal_lobe → temporal_lobe → frontal_lobe → cingulate
Subtype 2 ( n = 202, 35%): frontal_lobe → parietal_lobe → temporal_lobe → occipital_lobe → cingulate → insula
HC ( n = 3557): occipital_lobe → parietal_lobe → frontal_lobe → temporal_lobe → insula → cingulate
Ordering of Subtype 1 & Subtype 2. path: MRIthickness/sim_lobe_cortical_0917/sim
Ordering of HC. path:MRIthickness/sim_lobe_cortical_hc
The pairwise similarities between the ordering, none of the pairs are significantly associated.
The only baseline covariate that differed between the two subtypes was gestational age : subtype 1, 38.4 (2.9); subtype 2, 38.9 (2.3).
The total is larger than subtype 1 + subtype 2 bc we hide the HCs distribution.
