BREAKING UP WITH YOUR DRUG CAN BE HARD TO DO, BUT IS IT MAINLY BECAUSE COMPULSIVE BEHAVIOR INVOLVES SPECIFIC BRAIN REGIONS?
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Reading Lubman et al. (2004) stirred a memory. Years ago, The Royal Society of Canada convened a committee at the request of Health and Welfare Canada to consider whether nicotine in cigarettes was addictive (Kalant et al. 1989). Fortunately the chair of this committee was the distinguished Harold Kalant who had the experience of decades of working on prominent international committees (e.g. for the World Health Organization) concerned with the definition of drug dependence and addiction. (LTK also served on this RSC committee). The beginning of this report benefited especially from Kalant's experience with historical changes in terminology and definitions. It was judged that ‘Earlier definitions of drug addiction have evolved over the past 40 years, in the direction of diminishing emphasis on tolerance and physical dependence as defining features of addiction, and growing emphasis on the behavioural aspects of “compulsive” drug-seeking and drug-taking, reinforced by the psychoactive effects of the drug, and on the great difficulty in cessation of drug-taking and the high probability of relapse’ (p. v). The definition was: Drug addiction is a strongly established pattern of behaviour characterized by (1) The repeated self-administration of a drug in amounts which produce reinforcing psychoactive effects, and (2) great difficulty in achieving voluntary long-term cessation of such use, even when the user is strongly motivated to stop. (p. v) This definition might be shortened to: ‘a drug use that is difficult to stop.’ Part of our intent was to avoid terms like ‘withdrawal’, ‘psychological dependence’, and ‘physical dependence’ because of their unclear relationship to the underlying fact of difficulty in stopping. At the time we expressed reluctance to employ the ‘imprecise and mechanistically questionable term “compulsive.”’ Now, almost 15 years later, developments in brain imaging and neuroscience and progress in research on obsessive-compulsive disorder may have increased precision and have made it less questionable to explore what it means to say that addiction is a form of compulsive behavior, and there may be a promising idea of which brain regions are involved. In pursuing this program of research we would ask for more work to clarify what comes first—the addictive behavior or the brain dysfunction. We would also encourage a re-reading of an even older paper in addiction research. Did Lee Robins’ famous US soldiers who were addicted to heroin in Vietnam, but not when they returned home, have their brains (now their prefrontal cortexes) hi-jacked in South-East Asia, but freed in the US (Robins 1973)? Would longitudinal studies of changes in inhibitory brain dysfunction in these soldiers have helped explain this effect or were broader ecological issues more likely at play? Advancing our understanding of addiction will probably benefit from models that include measures of context as well as brain.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».