ArticleBritish journal of pharmacology2014
Drug effects on multiple and concurrent schedules of ethanol- and food-maintained behaviour: context-dependent selectivity.
Article in British journal of pharmacology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Equal response rates maintained by concurrent drug and nondrug reinforcers: a design for treatment evaluation.Behavioural pharmacology · 2020Article
- Development of a novel alcohol and nicotine concurrent access (ANCA) self-administration procedure in baboons.Drug and alcohol dependence · 2020Article
- Varenicline and GZ-793A differentially decrease methamphetamine self-administration under a multiple schedule of reinforcement in rats.Behavioural pharmacology · 2018Article
- Determinants of choice, and vulnerability and recovery in addiction.Behavioural processes · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
background and purposeDrugs that more potently or effectively reduce ethanol-maintained behaviour versus an alternative are considered selective and are considered promising pharmacotherapies for alcoholism. Such results are often obtained using separate groups or multiple schedules where ethanol and the alternative are available alone or sequentially. Recently, we observed that when ethanol and food were available sequentially under a multiple schedule, fluvoxamine and varenicline were selective; yet this selectivity disappeared when ethanol and food were concurrently available. EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH: We examined the generality of these findings by comparing doses of several drugs required to decrease ethanol- and food-maintained responding under a multiple schedule and under a concurrent schedule. Effects were determined for chlordiazepoxide, 2,5-dimethoxy-4-iodoamphetamine (DOI), meta-chlorophenylpiperazine (mCPP), morphine, naltrexone and d-amphetamine. KEY
resultsUnder the multiple schedule, ED50 values for decreases in ethanol-maintained responding were significantly different and lower than ED50 s for decreases in food-maintained responding (demonstrating selectivity) for each drug except for chlordiazepoxide (which was equipotent) and naltrexone (which did not affect responding). However, this selectivity vanished or even inverted under the concurrent schedule, such that ED50 values for decreasing ethanol- and food-maintained responding were not different (or, following DOI, the ED50 for food-maintained responding was lower than for ethanol-maintained responding). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Results are consistent with those seen following fluvoxamine and varenicline administration, and suggest that selectivity is assay-dependent. These results indicate the need for careful interpretation of selective drug effects, especially when obtained in situations where ethanol or the alternative is the only programmed reinforcement available.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.