MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effects of Naltrexone on Repressive Coping and Disclosure of Emotional Material: A Test of the Opioid-Peptide Hypothesis of Repression and Hypertension

2006· article· en· W2016158375 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jarred Younger, Kathleen A. Lawler‐Row, Krista Moe, Anna L. Kratz, Amy J. Keenum

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychosomatic Medicine · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicStress Responses and Cortisol
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNaltrexoneBlood pressureEndogenous opioidOpioidPsychologyOpioid peptideMedicineInternal medicineClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: The present study was designed to assess the role of endogenous opioids in the relationship of hypertension to repressive coping. Methods: Ten hypertensive and 8 normotensive males were given either the opioid antagonist naltrexone or placebo in a randomized, double-blind fashion over the course of four laboratory sessions. Measures of repression and disclosure were completed and blood pressure was assessed during a laboratory stressor protocol. Results: Opioid antagonism reduced repression and increased disclosure only in the hypertensive group. Also, opioid antagonism increased stress-related systolic blood pressure only in the hypertensive group. Conclusion: The results support the hypothesis that endogenous opioid dysregulation underlies both hypertension and repressive phenomena. DBP = diastolic blood pressure; SBP = systolic blood pressure; POMS = Profile of Mood States; LCC = Life Concerns Checklist; MAS = Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale; MCSDS = Social Desirability Scale; TAS = Toronto Alexithymia Scale.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.374
Threshold uncertainty score0.265

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations12
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychosomatic MedicineSame topicStress Responses and CortisolFrench-language works237,207