MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113454269 · doi:10.1155/2014/723632

Sex Differences and Menstrual Cycle Phase-Dependent Modulation of Craving for Cigarette: An fMRI Pilot Study

2014· article· en· W2113454269 on OpenAlexafffund
Adrianna Mendrek, Laurence Dinh-Williams, Josiane Bourque, Stéphane Potvin

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychiatry Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalInstitut Universitaire en Santé Mentale de QuébecBishop's University
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéBishop's UniversityEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsMenstrual cycleCravingFollicular phasePsychologyLuteal phaseMenstruationDevelopmental psychologyPhysiologyClinical psychologyMedicineAudiologyNeuroscienceInternal medicineHormoneAddiction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While overall more men than women smoke cigarettes, women and girls take less time to become dependent after initial use and have more difficulties quitting the habit. One of the factors contributing to these differences may be that women crave cigarettes more than men and that their desire to smoke is influenced by hormonal fluctuations across the menstrual cycle. Therefore, the purpose of the present study was twofold: (a) to examine potential sex/gender differences in functional neuroanatomy of craving and to (b) delineate neural correlates of cigarette cravings in women across their menstrual cycle. Fifteen tobacco-smoking men and 19 women underwent a functional MRI during presentation of neutral and smoking-related images, known to elicit craving. Women were tested twice: once during early follicular phase and once during midluteal phase of their menstrual cycle. The analysis did not reveal any significant sex differences in the cerebral activations associated with craving. Nevertheless, the pattern of activations in women varied across their menstrual cycle with significant activations in parts of the frontal, temporal, and parietal lobe, during follicular phase, and only limited activations in the right hippocampus during the luteal phase.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.330

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations24
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychiatry JournalSame topicSmoking Behavior and CessationFrench-language works237,207