Neuromelanin levels in individuals with substance use disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dopamine's role in addiction has been extensively studied, revealing disruptions in its functioning throughout all addiction stages. Neuromelanin in the substantia nigra (SN) may reflect dopamine auto-oxidation, and can be quantified using neuromelaninsensitive magnetic resonance imaging (neuromelanin-MRI) in a non-invasive manner.In this pre-registered systematic review, we assess the current body of evidence related to neuromelanin levels in substance use disorders, using both post-mortem and MRI examinations. The systematic search identified 10 relevant articles, primarily focusing on the substantia nigra. An early-stage meta-analysis (n = 6) revealed varied observations ranging from standardized mean differences of -3.55 to +0.62, with a pooled estimate of -0.44 (95 % CI = -1.52, 0.65), but there was insufficient power to detect differences in neuromelanin content among individuals with substance use disorders. Our gap analysis highlights the lack of sufficient replication studies, with existing studies lacking the power to detect a true difference, and a complete lack of neuromelanin studies on certain substances of clinical interest. We provide recommendations for future studies of dopaminergic neurobiology in addictions and related psychiatric comorbidities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.019 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".