The utility of rat models of impulsivity in developing pharmacotherapies for impulse control disorders
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High levels of impulsive behaviours are a clinically significant symptom in a range of psychiatric disorders, such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, bipolar disorder, personality disorders, pathological gambling and substance abuse. Although often measured using questionnaire assessments, levels of different types of impulsivity can also be determined using behavioural tests. Rodent analogues of these paradigms have been developed, and similar neural circuitry has been implicated in their performance in both humans and rats. In the current review, the methodology underlying the measurement of different aspects of impulsive action and choice are considered from the viewpoint of drug development, with a focus on the continuous performance task (CPT), stop-signal task (SST), go/no-go and delay-discounting paradigms. Current issues impeding translation between animal and human studies are identified, and comparisons drawn between the acute effects of dopaminergic, noradrenergic and serotonergic compounds across species. Although the field could benefit from a more systematic determination of different pharmacological agents across paradigms, there are signs of strong concordance between the animal and human data. However, the type of impulsivity measured appears to play a significant role, with the SST and delay discounting providing more consistent effects for dopaminergic drugs, while the CPT and SST show better predictive validity so far for serotonergic and noradrenergic compounds. Based on the available data, it would appear that these impulsivity models could be used more widely to identify potential pharmacotherapies for impulse control disorders. Novel targets within the glutamatergic and serotonergic system are also suggested.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it