MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3037910699 · doi:10.1111/adb.12930

Acute effects of a very low nicotine content cigarette on laboratory smoking lapse: Impacts of nicotine metabolism and nicotine dependence

2020· article· en· W3037910699 on OpenAlexafffund
Hera E. Schlagintweit, Rachel F. Tyndale, Christian S. Hendershot

Bibliographic record

VenueAddiction Biology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
KeywordsCravingNicotineSmoking cessationNicotine withdrawalNicotine dependenceMedicineAnesthesiaPhysiologyPsychologyCigarette smokingInternal medicineAddictionPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reducing cigarette nicotine content to nonaddictive levels facilitates smoking cessation; however, very low nicotine content cigarettes (VLNCs) may not be equally effective across heterogeneous smokers. We evaluated the impact of acute VLNC smoking versus control (sham puffs) on craving, withdrawal and smoking lapse behaviour and whether genetically influenced differences in nicotine metabolism and individual differences in nicotine dependence moderate observed effects. Thirty-three overnight-abstinent smokers (15 slow vs. 17 normal nicotine metabolizers; 17 low vs. 16 high nicotine dependence) smoked a 0.05-mg nicotine VLNC during one session and took sham VLNC puffs during another session, in a counterbalanced order. Craving and withdrawal were assessed before and after smoking and sham puffing. Next, participants completed the McKee Smoking Lapse Task, which measures ability to resist smoking and quantity of ad libitum smoking. VLNC (vs. sham) reduced craving and withdrawal, increased ability to resist smoking and reduced ad libitum smoking. VLNC-induced reduction in craving for positive reinforcement was greater in slow (vs. normal) metabolizers. Nicotine metabolism did not moderate any other VLNC responses. High-dependence (vs. low-dependence) participants engaged in greater ad lib smoking across VLNC and sham conditions. Nicotine dependence did not moderate VLNC responses. VLNC reduced craving, withdrawal and smoking lapse behaviour. Individual differences in nicotine metabolism and dependence had a minimal impact on VLNC responses; however, VLNCs were less effective at reducing craving for positive reinforcement among normal (vs. slow) metabolizers. These findings suggest that desirable VLNC effects may extend across heterogeneous groups of smokers.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.153
Threshold uncertainty score0.679

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAddiction BiologySame topicSmoking Behavior and CessationFrench-language works237,207