MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944045947 · doi:10.1093/ntr/ntz064

Non-pharmacological Considerations in Human Research of Nicotine and Tobacco Effects: A Review

2019· review· en· W2944045947 on OpenAlexafffund
Hera E. Schlagintweit, Robin N Perry, Christine Darredeau, Sean P. Barrett

Bibliographic record

VenueNicotine & Tobacco Research · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicNicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors Study
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNicotinePlaceboPsychologyMedicineStimulantAffect (linguistics)Clinical psychologyPharmacologyPsychiatryAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human research of nicotine and tobacco effects demonstrates that non-pharmacological factors may systematically affect responses to administered substances and inert placebos. Failure to measure or manipulate these factors may compromise study reliability and validity. This is especially relevant for double-blind placebo-controlled research of nicotine, tobacco, and related substances. In this article, we review laboratory-based human research of the impact of non-pharmacological factors on responses to tobacco and nicotine administration. Results suggest that varying beliefs about drug content and effects, perceptions about drug use opportunities, and intentions to cease drug use systematically alter subjective, behavioral, and physiological responses to nicotine, tobacco, and placebo administration. These non-pharmacological factors should be considered when designing and interpreting the findings of human research of nicotine and tobacco effects, particularly when a double-blind placebo-controlled design is used. The clinical implications of these findings are discussed, and we propose methodological strategies to enhance the reliability and validity of future research. IMPLICATIONS: Growing research demonstrates that non-pharmacological factors systematically alter responses to acute nicotine, tobacco, and placebo administration. Indeed, varying beliefs about nicotine and/or tobacco administration and effects, differing perceptions about nicotine and/or tobacco use opportunities, and inconsistent motivation to quit smoking have been found to exert important influences on subjective, physiological, and behavioral responses. These variables are infrequently measured or manipulated in nicotine and tobacco research, which compromises the validity of study findings. Incorporating methodological strategies to better account for these non-pharmacological factors has the potential to improve the quality of addiction research and treatment.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.196
GPT teacher head0.522
Teacher spread0.327 · 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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNicotine & Tobacco ResearchSame topicNicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors StudyFrench-language works237,207