Selective dopamine D4 receptor agonist (A-412997) improves cognitive performance and stimulates motor activity without influencing reward-related behaviour in rat
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current therapies for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder comprise psychostimulants, which block the dopamine transporter and/or stimulate the release of dopamine, leading to a global elevation in extrasynaptic dopamine. These drugs are, however, associated with a series of unwanted side effects such as insomnia, anorexia, headache, stomach problems and potential drug abuse. Recent evidence suggests that the dopamine D4 receptor may represent a selective dopamine target that could mediate cognitive as well as striatal motor processes. In this study we compare the effects of a selective D4 receptor agonist, A-412997, with methylphenidate or amphetamine in preclinical models of efficacy versus abuse liability. Both methylphenidate and A-412997 improved a temporally induced deficit in the rat novel object recognition task at doses 10-fold lower than those stimulating activity. In both cases, procognitive doses were associated with elevated extracellular levels of dopamine and acetylcholine in the medial prefrontal cortex. In contrast to amphetamine, A-412997 did not mediate reward-related behaviour in the conditioned place preference paradigm, a preclinical rodent test used to assess potential abuse liability. Collectively, these data suggest that selective activation of the D4 receptor may represent a target for the treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder without the potential drug abuse liability associated with current psychostimulant therapies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it