MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3149655449 · doi:10.1007/s12325-021-01718-6

Sensitivity, Specificity and Accuracy of a Novel EEG-Based Objective Test, the Cognalyzer®, in Detecting Cannabis Psychoactive Effects

2021· article· en· W3149655449 on OpenAlexafffund
Alison C. McDonald, Israel Gasperin Haaz, Weikai Qi, David C. Crowley, Najla Guthrie, Malkanthi Evans, Dan Bosnyak

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Therapy · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsLouisiana-Pacific (Canada)
FundersOntario Centre of Innovation
KeywordsMcNemar's testMedicineCannabisInhalationElectroencephalographyAnesthesiaInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current standards for identifying recent cannabis use are based on body fluid testing. The Cognalyzer ® is a novel electroencephalography (EEG) measurement device and algorithm designed to objectively characterize brainwave alterations associated with cannabis. The objective of this study was to assess the accuracy, sensitivity and specificity levels of the Cognalyzer ® to characterize brainwave alterations following cannabis inhalation. Seventy-five participants, aged 19–55 years, were enrolled, and oral fluid samples were collected pre-cannabis inhalation. EEG and subjective drug effects questionnaire (DEQ) were administered pre- and post-ad libitum cannabis inhalation. Fifty participants remained in the clinic for 4 h post-inhalation. Blinded analyses of the EEG files were conducted by Zentrela Inc. using two versions (V1 and V2) of the Cognalyzer ® algorithm. Pre- vs. post-inhalation comparison status was characterized by the Cognalyzer ® and summarized for: sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, percent false positive, percent false negative and positive and negative predictive value. The null hypothesis was tested using McNemar’s test. Cognalyzer ® results pre- and post-inhalation were combined with the oral fluid tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) concentration to evaluate potential to improve current drug testing. The two versions of the Cognalyzer ® algorithm had similar diagnostic results. Diagnostic outcomes were improved when participants with missing EEG recordings or electrode placement errors were removed. The Cognalyzer ® accuracy was 85.5% and 83.9%, sensitivity was 87.1% and 88.7%, and specificity was 83.9% and 79.0% for algorithm V1 and V2, respectively. Combining Cognalyzer ® results with oral fluid concentrations reduced false-positive oral fluid test results by up to 49%. The Cognalyzer ® characterized brainwave alterations associated with cannabis inhalation with high levels of accuracy in a population of participants with varied cannabis inhalation histories, relative to the comparison standard of pre- vs. post-inhalation status. The Cognalyzer ® allows the results to be generalized to the larger population addressing a limitation in currently accepted standards.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.403
Threshold uncertainty score0.521

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.320 · 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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in TherapySame topicCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchFrench-language works237,207