MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2735378370 · doi:10.20381/ruor-20616

Impact of Regular Low-Level Alcohol Consumption on Cognitive Interference and Response Inhibition: An fMRI Investigation in Young Adults

2017· dissertation· en· W2735378370 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Taylor Hatchard

Bibliographic record

VenueuO Research (University of Ottawa) · 2017
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResponse inhibitionAlcohol consumptionCognitionPsychologyAudiologyCognitive psychologyClinical psychologyAlcoholMedicineNeuroscienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of the present dissertation was to shed light on the neurophysiological effect of regular consumption of low amounts of alcohol on two important aspects of executive functions, cognitive interference and response inhibition, using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) in a sample of young adults. Participants were recruited from the Ottawa Prenatal Prospective Study (OPPS), a longitudinal study that has collected data from participants from infancy to young adulthood, which permitted control of a number of potentially confounding drug and lifestyle variables. This allowed for investigation of the unique effect of alcohol use on executive functions. The dissertation itself is comprised of two original manuscripts: the first study compared low-level alcohol users to controls on performance of the Counting Stroop, a task of cognitive interference; and the second study compared users to controls on performance of the Go/No-Go, a task of response inhibition.Although the results of both studies found no performance differences between groups, low-level alcohol users had significantly more brain activation in several regions, including areas not typically associated with task processing, compared to irregular or non-drinker controls. This difference in neurophysiology may be reflective of compensatory strategies within the brain, whereby the recruitment of additional regions may be attempting to compensate for potential underlying deficits that occur with increasing cognitive demand. While further research is needed to validate this hypothesis, the present findings highlight the vulnerability of the developing brain.

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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueuO Research (University of Ottawa)Same topicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlFrench-language works237,207