MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2324950256 · doi:10.1017/s1461145711001039

The suppression of appetite and food consumption by methylphenidate: the moderating effects of gender and weight status in healthy adults

2011· article· en· W2324950256 on OpenAlexafffund
Caroline Davis, Liana Fattore, Allan S. Kaplan, Jacqueline C. Carter, Robert D. Levitan, James L. Kennedy

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoYork UniversityCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsAppetiteMethylphenidateStimulantPlaceboObesityPsychologyWeight lossAttention deficit hyperactivity disorderAmphetamineDopamineInternal medicineMedicineEndocrinologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Females typically show greater behavioural responses to stimulant drugs than males, including loss of appetite; as seen, for example, in those who use methylphenidate (MP) therapeutically for treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). This is a relevant issue because of the strong link between ADHD and obesity. In a sample (n=132) of normal-weight (BMI <25) and obese (BMI >30) men and women we assessed appetite, cravings, and snack-food intake in response to MP (0.5 mg/kg) and placebo. Results indicated a significant three-way interaction for the three dependent variables--food-related responding diminishing in all groups from placebo to MP, except in obese males who showed no decreases to the MP challenge. These data show for the first time the existence of gender differences in the appetite response to MP, and are relevant for finding a dopamine pathway to new weight-loss medications, which would be utilized differently in males than in females.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 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

Citations58
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal of NeuropsychopharmacologySame topicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderFrench-language works237,207