MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996111172 · doi:10.1503/jpn.120111

Propranolol’s effects on the consolidation and reconsolidation of long-term emotional memory in healthy participants: a meta-analysis

2013· review· en· W1996111172 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory Processes and Influences
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University Institute
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMemory consolidationPropranololPsychologyMeta-analysisPsycINFORecallPlaceboConsolidation (business)Clinical psychologyCognitive psychologyMEDLINEMedicineNeuroscienceInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Considering the pivotal role of negative emotional experiences in the development and persistence of mental disorders, interfering with the consolidation/reconsolidation of such experiences would open the door to a novel treatment approach in psychiatry. We conducted a meta-analysis on the experimental evidence regarding the capacity of the ß-blocker propranolol to block the consolidation/reconsolidation of emotional memories in healthy adults. METHODS: Selected studies consisted of randomized, double-blind experiments assessing long-term memory for emotional material in healthy adults and involved at least 1 propranolol and 1 placebo condition. We searched PsycInfo, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Central, PILOTS, Google Scholar and clinicaltrials.org for eligible studies from the period 1995-2012. Ten consolidation (n = 259) and 8 reconsolidation (n = 308) experiments met the inclusion criteria. We calculated effect sizes (Hedges g) using a random effects model. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, propranolol given before memory consolidation reduced subsequent recall for negatively valenced stories, pictures and word lists (Hedges g = 0.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.14-0.74). Propranolol before reconsolidation also reduced subsequent recall for negatively valenced emotional words and the expression of cue-elicited fear responses (Hedges g = 0.56, 95% CI 0.13-1.00). LIMITATIONS: Limitations include the moderate number of studies examining the influence of propranolol on emotional memory consolidation and reconsolidation in healthy adults and the fact that most samples consisted entirely of young adults, which may limit the ecological validity of results. CONCLUSION: Propranolol shows promise in reducing subsequent memory for new or recalled emotional material in healthy adults. However, future studies will need to investigate whether more powerful idiosyncratic emotional memories can also be weakened and whether this weakening can bring about long-lasting symptomatic relief in clinical populations, such as patients with posttraumatic stress or other event-related disorders.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.841
Threshold uncertainty score0.594

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.210
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.186 · 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