MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3209567033 · doi:10.1007/s40120-021-00293-w

Use of a Novel EEG-Based Objective Test, the Cognalyzer®, in Quantifying the Strength and Determining the Action Time of Cannabis Psychoactive Effects and Factors that May Influence Them Within an Observational Study Framework

2021· article· en· W3209567033 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Dan Bosnyak, Alison C. McDonald, Israel Gasperin Haaz, Weikai Qi, David C. Crowley, Najla Guthrie, Malkanthi Evans

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology and Therapy · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOntario Centre of InnovationOntario Centres of Excellence
KeywordsCannabisObservational studyMedicineAction (physics)Test (biology)ElectroencephalographyNeurologyPsychiatryInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current methods to detect recent delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) use cannot objectively quantify its psychoactive effects (PE). The Cognalyzer®, an electroencephalography (EEG)-based method, detects and quantifies the strength of THC-induced PE on a scale from 0 to 100%. This study assesses the relationship between the magnitude of Cognalyzer® PE predictions and reported subjective drug effects for 4-h post-cannabis inhalation. Seventy-five participants were enrolled in the study. Prior to ad libitum cannabis inhalation, an EEG recording episode was completed. Immediately after inhalation, the Drug Effects Questionnaire (DEQ) was administered and another EEG recording performed. For 25 participants, the study ended. For 50 participants, assessments were repeated at 30-min intervals for 4 h. EEG files were blinded and analyzed using two versions of the Cognalyzer® algorithm. The relationship between the Cognalyzer® PE level results and the DEQ was assessed using generalized linear models and multiple regression. There were significant PE increases from pre-cannabis for up to 3.5 h. Mean reports of feeling drug effects were > 0 at all post-inhalation time points (p ≤ 0.024). Furthermore, there were significant relationships between the Cognalyzer® PE and self-reported perception of drug effects (p ≤ 0.001). Subgroup analysis showed that Cognalyzer® PE levels were impacted by cannabis use history, subjective ratings of drug effects, oral fluid THC concentration and the cannabis product inhaled. The findings show that the Cognalyzer® can be used to objectively determine the strength of cannabis psychoactive effects that cannabis products create on consumers and how it changes depending on their experience with cannabis. The Cognalyzer® can be used to conduct scientific consumer research to generate trustworthy informational material about the psychoactive experience of cannabis products. For clinical research, the Cognalyzer® can be used to study the pharmacodynamics of cannabinoids or delivery systems, such as nano-emulsifications.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.279

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.179
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurology and TherapySame topicCannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchFrench-language works237,207