MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2887860216 · doi:10.1080/17476348.2018.1507736

Understanding the implications of the biobehavioral basis of nicotine addiction and its impact on the efficacy of treatment

2018· review· en· W2887860216 on OpenAlexaff
Nikki Bozinoff, Bernard Le Foll

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Respiratory Medicine · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicNicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors Study
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAddictionNicotinePsychiatryIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Tobacco use remains the leading cause of preventable death in the United States. There are efficacious behavioral and pharmacological options for smoking cessation including three FDA approved therapies - nicotine replacement therapy, varenicline and bupropion. Nevertheless, uptake of smoking cessation treatments continues to be poor and there is a need for novel smoking cessation treatments. Areas covered: This article reviews the biobehavioral basis of nicotine addiction, its implications for smoking cessation treatments, the various neurotransmitter systems involved in nicotine addictive effects, and their potential therapeutic value. Included are discussions around the role of genetic factors in predicting response to pharmacotherapy and what we know about appropriate application of pharmacotherapy and behavioral interventions for tobacco use disorder. The evidence for harm reduction measures in individuals who are not willing or able to quit smoking is also reviewed. Expert commentary: Many neurotransmitter system targets have been investigated as a result of our understanding of the underlying neurobiology of tobacco use disorder, and there remain important targets that have yet to be fully explored. rTMS or combination therapies are proposed as possible novel strategies to improve smoking cessation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.862
Threshold uncertainty score0.535

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.149
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations10
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Respiratory MedicineSame topicNicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors StudyFrench-language works237,207