MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2804391210 · doi:10.2147/ndt.s164307

Valium without dependence? Individual GABA<sub>A</sub> receptor subtype contribution toward benzodiazepine addiction, tolerance, and therapeutic effects

2018· review· en· W2804391210 on OpenAlexaff
Tianze Cheng, D. Wallace, Benjamin Bixby Ponteri, Mahir Tuli

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAddictionBenzodiazepineGABAA receptorInsomniaAnxietyDiazepamPharmacologyReceptorDrug toleranceNeuroscienceDrugEpilepsygamma-Aminobutyric acidPsychiatryInternal medicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Benzodiazepines are one of the most prescribed medications as first-line treatment of anxiety, insomnia, and epilepsy around the world. Over the past two decades, advances in the neuropharmacological understanding of gamma aminobutyric acid (GABA) A receptors revealed distinct contributions from each subtype and produced effects. Recent findings have highlighted the importance of α1 containing GABA A receptors in the mechanisms of addiction and tolerance in benzodiazepine treatments. This has shown promise in the development of tranquilizers with minimal side effects such as cognitive impairment, dependence, and tolerance. A valium-like drug without its side effects, as repeatedly demonstrated in animals, is achievable. Keywords: benzodiazepines, subtype, tolerance, dependence, anxiolytic, GABA A receptor

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations44
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuropsychiatric Disease and TreatmentSame topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchFrench-language works237,207