MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3091637232 · doi:10.1038/s41386-020-00870-x

The endocannabinoid system in humans: significant associations between anandamide, brain function during reward feedback and a personality measure of reward dependence

2020· article· en· W3091637232 on OpenAlexaff
Carolin Redlich, Andrea Dlugos, Matthew N. Hill, Sachin Patel, Dominika Korn, Verena Enneking, Katharina Foerster, Volker Arolt, Katharina Domschke, Udo Dannlowski, Ronny Redlich

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuropsychopharmacology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsPutamenReward dependencePsychologyEndocannabinoid systemPersonalityBrain stimulation rewardAnandamideReward systemBasal gangliaHarm avoidanceInternal medicineDevelopmental psychologyNeuroscienceEndocrinologyBig Five personality traitsDopamineCentral nervous systemMedicineNucleus accumbensCannabinoid receptorSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Preclinical evidence indicates that the endocannabinoid system is involved in neural responses to reward. This study aimed to investigate associations between basal serum concentrations of the endocannabinoids anandamide (AEA) and 2-arachidonylglycerol (2-AG) with brain functional reward processing. Additionally, a personality measure of reward dependence was obtained. Brain functional data were obtained of 30 right-handed adults by conducting fMRI at 3 Tesla using a reward paradigm. Reward dependence was obtained using the subscale reward dependence of the Tridimensional Personality Questionnaire (TPQ). Basal concentrations of AEA and 2-AG were determined in serum. Analyzing the fMRI data, for AEA and 2-AG ANCOVAs were calculated using a full factorial model, with condition (reward > control, loss > control) and concentrations for AEA and 2-AG as factors. Regression analyses were conducted for AEA and 2-AG on TPQ-RD scores. A whole-brain analysis showed a significant interaction effect of AEA concentration by condition (positive vs. negative) within the putamen ( x = 26, y = 16, z = −8, F13.51, TFCE (1, 54) = 771.68, k = 70, P FWE = 0.044) resulting from a positive association of basal AEA concentrations and putamen activity to rewarding stimuli, while this association was absent in the loss condition. AEA concentrations were significantly negatively correlated with TPQ reward dependence scores ( r spearman = −0.56, P = 0.001). These results show that circulating AEA may modulate brain activation during reward feedback and that the personality measure reward dependence is correlated with AEA concentrations in healthy human volunteers. Future research is needed to further characterize the nature of the lipids’ influence on reward processing, the impact on reward anticipation and outcome, and on vulnerability for psychiatric disorders.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueNeuropsychopharmacologySame topicCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchFrench-language works237,207