Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17235611›Full record

Trial reportPsychopharmacology2007

Euphoriant effects of nicotine in smokers: fact or artifact?

Reuven Dar, Rachel Kaplan, Lior Shaham, Hanan Frenk

Abstract readClinical Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Psychopharmacology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Differences in Subjective Experiences to First Use of Menthol and Nonmenthol Cigarettes in a National Sample of Young Adult Cigarette Smokers.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2018
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Reuven DarDepartment of Psychology, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, 69978, Israel. ruvidar@freud.tau.ac.il
Rachel Kaplan
Lior Shaham
Hanan Frenk
Tel Aviv University · ILAcademic College of Tel Aviv-Yafo · IL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

rationaleThe claim that nicotine in cigarettes is euphoriant to smokers is largely based on two studies (Pomerleau and Pomerleau, Psychopharmacology, 108:460-465, 1992; Tobacco Control, 3:374, 1994) in which smokers were instructed to respond to sensations of rush, buzz, or high while smoking low-nicotine or regular cigarettes. However, the assumption that these sensations are pleasurable was not tested and may have biased the results.

objectivesThe aim of this study was to re-examine the claim that smoked nicotine is euphoriant to smokers.

methodsStudy 1 surveyed the frequency and pleasantness of the smoking-related sensations of rush, buzz, and high in a sample of smokers. Study 2 replicated Pomerleau and Pomerleau (Psychopharmacology, 108:460-465, 1992) with two sets of instruction. One set, as in the original study, defined these sensations as pleasurable, whereas the other defined them as unpleasant.

resultsStudy 1 found that whereas rush and high were perceived as pleasant, buzz was unpleasant to most smokers. Study 2 found that under both sets of instructions, smokers reported more sensations when smoking the regular, as compared to the low-nicotine cigarette. Additionally, the sensations of rush, buzz, and high were rated as more pleasant under the pleasant instructions as compared to the unpleasant instructions. Finally, in the pleasant instructions condition, many participants reported having pressed the button to indicate a pleasurable sensation despite having actually experienced that sensation as unpleasant.

conclusionsOur results suggest that the findings of Pomerleau and Pomerleau (Psychopharmacology, 108:460-465, 1992; Tobacco Control, 3:374, 1994) may have been biased by the experimental instructions and cannot be taken as evidence that smoked nicotine is euphoriant to smokers.

Indexed as

SmokingAdultData CollectionDose-Response Relationship, DrugEuphoriaFemaleGanglionic StimulantsHumansMaleNicotineSensationGanglionic StimulantsNicotine

Identifiers

PMID17235611
OpenAlexW2005476761

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.