MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Correction: Long Term Suboxone™ Emotional Reactivity As Measured by Automatic Detection in Speech

2013· article· en· W1989274926 on OpenAlexaff
Edward E. Hill, David K. Han, Pierre Dumouchel, Najim Dehak, Thomas F. Quatieri, Charles P. Moehs, Marlene Oscar‐Berman, John Giordano, Thomas Simpatico, Kenneth Blum

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotion and Mood Recognition
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNational Institute on Alcohol Abuse and AlcoholismNational Institutes of HealthU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
KeywordsBuprenorphineHeroinEmotionalityOpioid(+)-NaloxoneClinical psychologyPsychologyPsychiatryMedicineMethadoneAddictionPrescription Drug MisusePopulationOpioid use disorderDevelopmental psychologyInternal medicineDrug

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Addictions to illicit drugs are among the nation's most critical public health and societal problems. The current opioid prescription epidemic and the need for buprenorphine/naloxone (SuboxoneH; SUBX) as an opioid maintenance substance, and its growing street diversion provided impetus to determine affective states (''true ground emotionality'') in long-term SUBX patients. Toward the goal of effective monitoring, we utilized emotion-detection in speech as a measure of ''true'' emotionality in 36 SUBX patients compared to 44 individuals from the general population (GP) and 33 members of Alcoholics Anonymous (AA). Other less objective studies have investigated emotional reactivity of heroin, methadone and opioid abstinent patients. These studies indicate that current opioid users have abnormal emotional experience, characterized by heightened response to unpleasant stimuli and blunted response to pleasant stimuli. However, this is the first study to our knowledge to evaluate ''true ground'' emotionality in long-term buprenorphine/naloxone combination (Suboxone TM ). We found in long-term SUBX patients a significantly flat affect (p,0.01), and they had less self-awareness of being happy, sad, and anxious compared to both the GP and AA groups. We caution definitive interpretation of these seemingly important results until we compare the emotional reactivity of an opioid abstinent control using automatic detection in speech. These findings encourage continued research strategies in SUBX patients to target the specific brain regions responsible for relapse prevention of opioid addiction.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.810
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.005

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.221 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations6
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicEmotion and Mood RecognitionFrench-language works237,207