MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285604429 · doi:10.15288/jsad.2022.83.461

Neurobiology and Symptomatology of Post-Acute Alcohol Withdrawal: A Mixed-Studies Systematic Review

2022· article· en· W4285604429 on OpenAlexaff
Anees Bahji, David Crockford, Nady el‐Guebaly

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlcoholism and Thiamine Deficiency
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Institute on Drug Abuse
KeywordsIrritabilityAnhedoniaDysphoriaAnxietyClinical psychologyAbstinenceSystematic reviewMedicinePsychiatryCognitionAffect (linguistics)Alcohol use disorderRandomized controlled trialNucleus accumbensPoison controlPsychologyEuphoriantMEDLINESchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)AlcoholDopamineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to review the neurobiology and symptomatology of post-acute alcohol withdrawal syndrome (PAWS). METHOD: We conducted a PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses)-guided systematic review of articles from two databases for English-language randomized and nonrandomized studies involving PAWS published between database inception and December 2020. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies met inclusion criteria. PAWS involves predominantly negative affect, which develops in early abstinence and can persist for 4-6 months or longer. Symptoms include anxiety, dysphoria, anhedonia, sleep disturbance, cognitive impairment, cravings, and irritability. PAWS symptoms appear to be risk factors for recurrent alcohol consumption. They have been associated with reported neurobiological differences in evoked potentials; measures of orexins, cortisol, serotonin, and pancreatic polypeptides; and neuroadaptation changes in the nucleus accumbens and the prefrontal cortex. CONCLUSIONS: There is credible evidence to support the concept of PAWS based on this review's findings. There remains a need to develop and test specific criteria for PAWS. High-quality treatment studies involving agents addressing its neurobiological underpinnings are also recommended.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.047
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.047
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.012
Bibliometrics0.0090.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations16
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Studies on Alcohol and DrugsSame topicAlcoholism and Thiamine DeficiencyFrench-language works237,207