MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014198842 · doi:10.15288/jsad.2009.70.308

A Clinical Trial Demonstration of a Web-Based Test for Alcohol and Drug Effects

2009· article· en· W2014198842 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kenneth C. Mills, Susan E. Spruill, Jason Walker, Michael Lamson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicForensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePharmacodynamicsTest (biology)Blood alcohol contentAlcoholCrossover studyReliability (semiconductor)Poison controlBlood alcoholDatabaseInjury preventionEmergency medicineComputer sciencePharmacologyPharmacokinetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the feasibility of a Web-installed test of skills essential to driving: target detection and divided attention. The Attention Assessment (TAA) was designed for use in global clinical trials to document the effects of alcohol and other drugs. METHOD: Scoring algorithms and data-storage tools were installed on servers in bicoastal U.S. locations. IBM PC-compatible test units with encrypted Web access and 19-inch monitors were installed at a Canadian site. A single-center, crossover design was used to compare the pharmacodynamic properties of a pharmaceutical compound under development with those of alcohol (blood alcohol concentration [BAC]=.10%) over time. For this study, 33 subjects completed four 36-hour testing periods. Blood samples and pharmacodynamic assessments were performed at 0, 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 12, and 24 hours. Analysis of covariance was conducted on six composite TAA scores as change from baseline. RESULTS: Five of the six composite scores showed significant ethanol effects (p<.02) over a BAC range of. 1% to .05%. Within-session test-retest reliability was r=.86 and between periods was r=.51 (between Periods 1 and 2), .83 (between Periods 2 and 3), and .81 (between Periods 3 and 4). Individual impairment was evident at .05%. CONCLUSIONS: It was possible to conduct sensitive alcohol/other drug testing from a central database with secure scoring. Test installation, data monitoring, and norms assembly were performed at a remote location. TAA gives researchers the ability to immediately and normatively evaluate alcohol and drug effects in diverse global locations. Secondary applications include clinical or worksite testing. The data show improved precision over previous test versions to map the effect of drugs on visual/cognitive skills involved in driving.

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)0.003
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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.517
Threshold uncertainty score0.658

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.356 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Studies on Alcohol and DrugsSame topicForensic Toxicology and Drug AnalysisFrench-language works237,207