The impact of cannabidiol placebo on amygdala-based neural responses to an acute stressor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cannabidiol (CBD) impacts brain regions implicated in anxiety reactivity and stress reactivity (e.g., amygdala, anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), anterior insula (AI)); however, placebo-controlled studies are mixed regarding CBD's anxiolytic effects. We previously reported that CBD expectancy alone can alter subjective, physiological, and endocrine markers of stress/anxiety; however, it is unclear whether these findings reflect altered brain reactivity. This study evaluated whether CBD expectancy independently alters amygdala resting-state functional connectivity (rsFC) with the ACC and AI following acute stress. METHOD: Thirty-eight (20 females) healthy adults were randomly assigned to receive accurate or inaccurate information regarding the CBD content of a CBD-free oil administered during a single experimental session. Following a baseline resting state MRI scan, participants administered their assigned oil sublingually, engaged in a stress task (serial subtraction with negative feedback) inside the scanner, and underwent another resting state MRI scan. Amygdala rsFC with the ACC and AI was measured during each scan, and the subjective state was assessed at six time points. Outcomes were analyzed using ANCOVA. RESULTS: values > 0.05). We also replicated our previously reported CBD expectancy effects on subjective stress/anxiety in the scanner context. CONCLUSION: CBD placebo effects may be sufficient to alter neural responses relevant to its purported anxiolytic and stress-relieving properties. Future work is needed to replicate these results and determine whether CBD expectancy and pharmacology interact to alter neural anxiety reactivity and stress reactivity.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".