Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26388788›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in psychology2015

Impulsive delayed reward discounting as a genetically-influenced target for drug abuse prevention: a critical evaluation.

Joshua C Gray, James MacKillop

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. A systematic review and meta-analysis of delay discounting and cannabis use.Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology · 2021
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Genetically influenced externalizing and internalizing risk pathways as novel prevention targets.Psychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors · 2022
    Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Associations Between Steep Delay Discounting and Punishment Learning.Computational psychiatry (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Reducing impulsive choice: VI. Delay-exposure training reduces aversion to delay-signaling stimuli.Psychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors · 2020
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Joshua C GrayDepartment of Psychology, University of Georgia , Athens, GA, USA.
James MacKillopDepartment of Psychology, University of Georgia , Athens, GA, USA ; Peter Boris Centre for Addictions Research, McMaster University/St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton , Hamilton, ON, Canada.
University of Georgia · US

Funding

Vulnerability to Drug Use & HIV: Advancing Prevention for Rural African AmericansP30DA027827 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA · PI BRODY, GENE H. · 2009 to 2018
$10.2M
NIDA NIH HHS P30 DA027827
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review evaluates the viability of delayed reward discounting (DRD), an index of how much an individual devalues a future reward based on its delay in time, for genetically-informed drug abuse prevention. A review of the literature suggests that impulsive DRD is robustly associated with drug addiction and meets most of the criteria for being an endophenotype, albeit with mixed findings for specific molecular genetic influences. Several modes of experimental manipulation have been demonstrated to reduce DRD acutely. These include behavioral strategies, such as mindfulness, reward bundling, and episodic future thinking; pharmacological interventions, including noradrenergic agonists, adrenergic agonists, and multiple monoamine agonists; and neuromodulatory interventions, such as transcranial magnetic stimulation and transcranial direct current stimulation. However, the generalization of these interventions to positive clinical outcomes remains unclear and no studies to date have examined interventions on DRD in the context of prevention. Collectively, these findings suggest it would be premature to target DRD for genetically-informed prevention. Indeed, given the evidence of environmental contributions to impulsive DRD, whether genetically-informed secondary prevention would ever be warranted is debatable. Progress in identifying polymorphisms associated with DRD profiles could further clarify the underlying biological systems for pharmacological and neuromodulatory interventions, and, as a qualitatively different risk factor from existing prevention programs, impulsive DRD is worthy of investigation at a more general level as a novel and promising drug abuse prevention target.

Indexed as

addictionbehavioral economicsbehavior economicsdelayed reward discountingdrug abuseintertemporal choicesubstance use disorders

Identifiers

PMID26388788
PMCPMC4554956
OpenAlexW1860472437

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.