Characterization of Abuse Properties of the Anesthetic Propofol Using the Self-administration Paradigm in Rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Propofol is a widely in use anesthetic drug. Propofol’s abuse liability has been supported by many case reports and a few animal studies. However, propofol’s reinforcing properties have not yet been investigated in-depth. In this study, multiple aspects of propofol’s abuse-related behaviour were investigated using the drug self-administration model in rats. METHODS: Rats were subjected to propofol self-administration under a fixed ratio 1 (FR1) schedule and different aspects of propofol self-administration behaviour including acquisition, maintenance of the behaviour under a higher ratio schedule, extinction and reinstatement were investigated. RESULTS: Rats acquired propofol self-administration under a FR1 schedule. The acquired behaviour was maintained under a FR2 schedule, showed a modest variation over a range of doses, and was extinguished upon substitution of vehicle for propofol, showing no reinstatement using a range of priming doses of propofol. CONCLUSION: Propofol has abuse potential showing modest reinforcing properties under our experimental conditions.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".