Effects of an acute cannabidiol treatment on cocaine self-administration and cue-induced cocaine seeking in male rats
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
Cannabidiol is a non-psychoactive compound that is the second most abundant component of cannabis. It has been shown to have a potential therapeutic value for a wide range of disorders, including anxiety, psychosis, and depression. Recently, it was suggested that cannabidiol might be a potential treatment for heroin craving and relapse. Here we investigated the effects of an acute treatment with cannabidiol on cocaine self-administration and cue-induced cocaine seeking in rats. Rats were trained to press a lever to self-administer cocaine (0.5 mg/kg/infusion), first under a fixed interval 20 s (FI-20 s) and then under a progressive ratio (PR) schedule of reinforcement. Cocaine self-administration under a PR schedule of reinforcement was not attenuated by cannabidiol injections (5.0 mg/kg and 10.0 mg/kg; i.p.) when tested 30 min and 24 h after treatment. Cannabidiol treatment (5.0 mg/kg or 10.0 mg/kg) also did not attenuate cue-induced cocaine seeking in rats after a withdrawal period of 14 days. In contrast, treatment with cannabidiol (10.0 mg/kg; i.p.) resulted in a statistically significant anxiolytic effect in the elevated plus-maze. Our findings suggest that, under the conditions described here, an acute cannabidiol treatment has a minimal effect on a rat model of cocaine intake and relapse.
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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