Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27747369›Full record

ArticlePsychopharmacology2017

Haloperidol 2 mg impairs inhibition but not visuospatial attention.

H N Alexander Logemann, Koen B E Böcker, Peter K H Deschamps, Peter N van Harten, Jeroen Koning, Chantal Kemner, Zsófia Logemann-Molnár, J Leon Kenemans

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Psychopharmacology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Dispositional Mindfulness and Inhibitory Control after Perceiving Neutral, Food and Money Related Stimuli.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

H N Alexander LogemannHelmholtz Research Institute, Department of Experimental Psychology, Utrecht University, P.O. Box 80140, 3508 TC,, Utrecht, The Netherlands. h.n.a.logemann@gmail.com.
Koen B E BöckerAlan Turing Insitute Almere, Louis Armstrongweg 84, 1311 RL,, Almere, The Netherlands.
Peter K H DeschampsDepartment of Psychiatry, Brain Center Rudolf Magnus, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Peter N van HartenDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Jeroen KoningPsychiatric centre Pro Persona, Siependaallaan 3, 4003 LE, Tiel, The Netherlands.
Chantal KemnerDepartment of Psychiatry, Brain Center Rudolf Magnus, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Zsófia Logemann-MolnárAdapting Minds, Databankweg 12, 3821 AL, Amersfoort, The Netherlands.
J Leon KenemansHelmholtz Research Institute, Department of Experimental Psychology, Utrecht University, P.O. Box 80140, 3508 TC,, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Heidelberg University · DEUtrecht University · NLMaastricht University Medical Centre · NLPro Persona · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

rationaleThe dopaminergic system has been implicated in visuospatial attention and inhibition, but the exact role has yet to be elucidated. Scarce literature suggests that attenuation of dopaminergic neurotransmission negatively affects attentional focusing and inhibition. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that evaluated the effect of dopaminergic antagonism on stopping performance.

methodsDopaminergic neurotransmission was attenuated in 28 healthy male participants by using 2 mg haloperidol. A repeated-measures placebo-controlled crossover design was implemented, and performance indices of attention and inhibition were assessed in the visual spatial cueing task (VSC) and stop signal task (SST). Additionally, the effect of haloperidol on motoric parameters was assessed. It was expected that haloperidol as contrasted to placebo would result in a reduction of the "validity effect," the benefit of valid cueing as opposed to invalid cueing of a target in terms of reaction time. Furthermore, an increase in stop signal reaction time (SSRT) in the SST was expected. RESULTS AND

conclusionResults partially confirmed the hypothesis. Haloperidol negatively affected inhibitory motor control in the SST as indexed by SSRT, but there were no indications that haloperidol affected bias or disengagement in the VSC task as indicated by a lack of an effect on RTs. Pertaining to secondary parameters, motor activity increased significantly under haloperidol. Haloperidol negatively affected reaction time variability and errors in both tasks, as well as omissions in the SST, indicating a decreased sustained attention, an increase in premature responses, and an increase in lapses of attention, respectively.

Indexed as

Inhibition, PsychologicalAdultAttentionCross-Over StudiesCuesDopamine AntagonistsHaloperidolHumansMalePhotic StimulationPsychomotor PerformanceRandom AllocationReaction TimeVisual PerceptionYoung AdultDopamine AntagonistsHaloperidolAttentionDopamineDopaminergicHaloperidolInhibitionMotor activity

Identifiers

PMID27747369
OpenAlexW2536533283

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.