MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2740976059 · doi:10.1139/cjpp-2017-0013

Virtual Morris task responses in individuals in an abstinence phase from alcohol

2017· article· en· W2740976059 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mauro Ceccanti, Giovanna Coriale, Derek A. Hamilton, Valentina Carito, Roberto Coccurello, Bruna Scalese, Stefania Ciafrè, Claudia Codazzo, Marisa Patrizia Messina, George N. Chaldakov, Marco Fiore

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlcohol use disorderAbstinenceAlcoholAddictionAlcohol addictionPsychologyMedicineYoung adultAudiologyDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study was aimed at examining spatial learning and memory, in 33 men and 12 women with alcohol use disorder (AUD) undergoing ethanol detoxification, by using a virtual Morris task. As controls, we recruited 29 men and 10 women among episodic drinkers without a history of alcohol addiction or alcohol-related diseases. Elevated latency to the first movement in all trials was observed only in AUD persons; furthermore, control women had longer latencies compared with control men. Increased time spent to reach the hidden platform in the learning phase was found for women of both groups compared with men, in particular during trial 3. As predicted, AUD persons (more evident in men) spent less time in the target quadrant during the probe trial; however, AUD women had longer latencies to reach the platform in the visible condition during trials 6 and 7 that resulted in a greater distance moved. As for the probe trial, men of both groups showed increased virtual locomotion compared with the women of both groups. The present investigation confirms and extends previous studies showing (i) different gender responses in spatial learning tasks, (ii) some alterations due to alcohol addiction in virtual spatial learning, and (iii) differences between AUD men and AUD women in spatial-behaviour-related paradigms.

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)0.000
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 score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations33
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physiology and PharmacologySame topicMemory and Neural MechanismsFrench-language works237,207