MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2049459298 · doi:10.1037/0735-7044.121.3.586

Treatment with a serotonin-depleting regimen of MDMA prevents conditioned place preference to sex in male rats.

2007· article· en· W2049459298 on OpenAlexaff
Megan M. W. Straiko, Gary A. Gudelsky, Lique M. Coolen

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioral Neuroscience · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicForensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Institute on Drug AbuseU.S. Public Health Service
KeywordsMDMAEcstasyConditioned place preferenceSerotoninPsychologyEjaculationSexual behaviorPharmacologyDevelopmental psychologyPhysiologyMedicineEndocrinologyInternal medicineNeurosciencePsychiatryDopamine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Among young adults, 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA, "ecstasy") is a popular drug of abuse, and anecdotal evidence indicates that repeated use of MDMA may result in impairments in sexual function and decreased sex drive in human users. There has been little investigation of the effects of MDMA on sexual function in rodents. In the present study, the authors determined that in male rats (Rattus novegicus) tested in a sexually naïve or a sexually experienced state, administration of a serotonin (5-HT)-depleting regimen of MDMA did not produce a change in mount, intromission, and ejaculation latency or in mount and intromission frequency compared with such latency and frequency in vehicle-treated control rats. In contrast to vehicle-treated rats, MDMA-treated rats did not form a conditioned place preference (CPP) to sex. Failure of MDMA-treated rats to form CPP to sex may be due to MDMA-induced impairments in circuits mediating sexual reward.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations16
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBehavioral NeuroscienceSame topicForensic Toxicology and Drug AnalysisFrench-language works237,207