The Changes of the Cognitive and Psychomotor Functions in the Chronic Cannabis Users after a Month of Remission
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: In our study, it is aimed to investigate impacts of cannabis use on information processing and psychomotor functions and to examine changes in the cognitive functions at the end of abstinence over a month.Method: The study was initiated with 34 volunteer participants using cannabis at least over two years, directed by a forensic unit. 34 persons were assessed at admission and were planned to assess after a month of remission. As 14 participants discontinued the study 20 participants only were assessed again at the end of a month. The participants were applied The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA) test, Edinburgh Handedness Inventory, Finger Tapping Test (FTT), Adult Memory and Information Processing Battery (AMIPB) A and B, and simple reaction time tests (auditory and visual) in admission and were applied Finger Tapping Test (FTT), Adult Memory and Information Processing Battery (AMIPB), and simple reaction time tests (auditory and visual) at the end of a month.Results: There was no statistically significant difference between participants continue to the treatment and those discontinue in terms of sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. The participants discontinue were using more daily cannabis dose. The auditory reaction time of the group continue to the treatment decreased statistically significantly after a month whereas there was no statistically significant difference in the visual reaction time. The scores of the AMIPB-A and AMIPB-B were detected statistically higher after a month compared to admission. The score of the dominant hand FTT after a month was detected statistically higher than that in admission whereas there was no statistically significant difference in the non-dominant hand score.Conclusion: Improvements in scores of AMIP-A, AMIP-B, FTT and auditory reaction time after one month of quitting cannabis suggest that cannabis use may impair cognitive functions such as information processing, reaction time and motor functions. We suggest that future studies to assess cognitive functions after either a shorter (i.e. 1 week) or a longer (i.e. 2 months) period of cannabis abstinence in larger samples may provide further useful data about the relationship between cannabis use and cognitive functions.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".