The impacts of actual and perceived nicotine administration on insula functional connectivity with the anterior cingulate cortex and nucleus accumbens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Changes in resting state functional connectivity between the insula and dorsal anterior cingulate cortex as well as between the insula and nucleus accumbens have been linked to nicotine withdrawal and/or administration. However, because many of nicotine's effects in humans appear to depend, at least in part, on the belief that nicotine has been administered, the relative contribution of nicotine's pharmacological actions to such effects requires clarification. AIMS: The purpose of this study was to examine the impacts of perceived and actual nicotine administration on neural responses. METHODS: Twenty-six smokers were randomly assigned to receive either a nicotine inhaler (4 mg deliverable) or a nicotine-free inhaler across two sessions. Inhaler content instructions (told nicotine vs told nicotine-free) differed across sessions. Resting state functional connectivity between sub-regions of the insula and the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex and nucleus accumbens was measured using magnetic resonance imaging before and after inhaler administration. RESULTS: Both actual and perceived nicotine administration independently altered resting state functional connectivity between the anterior insula and the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex, with actual administration being associated with decreased resting state functional connectivity, and perceived administration with increased resting state functional connectivity. Actual nicotine administration also contralaterally reduced resting state functional connectivity between the anterior insula and nucleus accumbens, while reductions in resting state functional connectivity between the mid-insula and right nucleus accumbens were observed when nicotine was administered unexpectedly. Changes in resting state functional connectivity associated with actual or perceived nicotine administration were unrelated to changes in subjective withdrawal and craving. Changes in withdrawal and craving were however independently associated with resting state functional connectivity between the nucleus accumbens and insula. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight the importance of considering non-pharmacological factors when examining drug mechanisms of action.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".