Psychostimulant users are sensitive to the stimulant properties of alcohol as indexed by alcohol-induced cardiac reactivity.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One indicator of increased sensitivity to alcohol-induced reward is a heightened heart rate (HR) increase following alcohol intoxication, a characteristic associated with increased alcohol-induced dopamine (DA) release. The goal of this study was to determine whether users of drugs known to induce DA release have higher HR increases after alcohol intoxication than never users have. Sixty-four men with known drug-use histories participated in an alcohol challenge in which HR was measured. Stimulant users had significantly higher ethanol-induced HR increases than never users had, although use of marijuana or hallucinogens was not associated with this marker. Stimulant users obtained superior Sensitivity to Reward scores (R. Torrubia, C. Avila, J. Moltó, & X. Caseras, 2001) compared with never users. Stimulant drug users may be more sensitive to the stimulating properties of alcohol, and this appears to be mediated by superior activity in the Behavioral Approach System (J. A. Gray, 1991).
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".