MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2979505826 · doi:10.1089/can.2019.0017

Impact of At Least 2 Years of Synthetic Cannabinoid Use on Cognitive and Psychomotor Functions Among Treatment-Seeking Male Outpatients

2019· article· en· W2979505826 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gökhan Umut, Cüneyt Evren, Murat İlhan Atagün, Ozge Hisim, Hanife Yılmaz Çengel, Müge Bozkurt, Cahit Keskinkılıç

Bibliographic record

VenueCannabis and Cannabinoid Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychomotor learningCognitionMontreal Cognitive AssessmentPsychiatryPsychologyMedicinePediatricsCognitive impairmentClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Synthetic cannabinoid (SC) use, an important public health problem, is becoming increasingly widespread and leads to many medical and psychiatric problems. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of SC use on cognitive and psychomotor functions of patients. Materials and Methods: The participants (30 outpatients with SC use disorder and 33 healthy controls) were administered the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA) test, the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory (EHI), the Finger-Tapping Test (FTT), and the Adult Memory and Information Processing Battery-B form (AMIPB-B). Results: The SC users scored lower in AMIPB-B, MOCA. and FTT compared to the healthy controls. Conclusion: These findings suggest that SC might impair both cognitive and psychomotor functions. Therefore, outpatients with SC use disorder should be carefully evaluated for cognitive and psychomotor functions since neurological examinations and interventions may also be required in treatment programs for these cases.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.119
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.309 · 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.

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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchSame topicCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchFrench-language works237,207