Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28007490›Full record

ReviewAppetite2018

Gut-brain nutrient sensing in food reward.

Ari Shechter, Gary J Schwartz

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Appetite, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Glucose Sensing in the Hepatic Portal Vein and Its Role in Food Intake and Reward.Cellular and molecular gastroenterology and hepatology · 2023
    Review
  5. Insulin Action to Inhibit Food Intake: Is It All in Your Head?The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2022
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Sugars and Sweet Taste: Addictive or Rewarding?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Cannabinoid CBNutrients · 2020
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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.

Ari ShechterDepartment of Medicine, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, United States. Electronic address: as4874@columbia.edu.
Gary J SchwartzDepartments of Medicine & Neuroscience, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY 10461, United States.

Funding

RESEARCH TRAININGP30DK026687 · NIDDK · ST. LUKE'S-ROOSEVELT INST FOR HLTH SCIS · PI Anthony W Ferrante, DYMPNA GALLAGHER · 1986 to 2026
$33.0M
Translational Research CoreP30DK020541 · NIDDK · ALBERT EINSTEIN COLLEGE OF MEDICINE, INC · PI STREAMSON C CHUA · 2015 to 2026
$27.7M
Brainstem nutrient sensing in the integrative control of food intakeR01DK105441 · NIDDK · ALBERT EINSTEIN COLLEGE OF MEDICINE, INC · PI SCHWARTZ, GARY J · 2015 to 2018
$1.5M
NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK020541NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK026687NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK105441
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For the past several decades, vagal and hormonal gut-brain negative feedback signaling mechanisms that promote satiety and subsequent suppression of food intake have been explored. In addition, a separate positive feedback process termed "appetition," involving postoral signaling from the gut to the brain, has been shown to promote food intake and produce flavor-nutrient preference conditioning. Afferent fibers emerging from the vagus nerve form the main pathway by which information is relayed from the abdominal viscera to the hindbrain and eventually other higher brain regions involved in food intake. Using a specialized subdiaphragmatic vagal deafferentation technique, it was observed that gut vagal and splanchnic afferents play a role in the negative feedback control of satiety after nutrient intake; however, these afferents are not required for nutrient reinforcement or flavor-nutrient preference conditioning, thereby highlighting the distinction between the processes of satiation and appetition. By linking these physiological and behavioral processes to a neurochemical mechanism, it was found that striatal dopamine release induced by intragastric glucose infusion is involved in sweet appetite conditioning. The mechanisms underlying appetition are still being investigated but may involve other nondopaminergic neurochemical systems and/or presently undiscovered hormonal mediators. Future work to delineate the biological mechanisms whereby appetition drives increased intake and conditioned food preference in response to ingestion should take a multifaceted approach by integrating hormonal, neurophysiological, and behavioral techniques.

Indexed as

RewardAnimalsAppetiteBrainChoice BehaviorDietDopamineEatingFood PreferencesGastrointestinal TractHumansReinforcement, PsychologySatiationTasteVagus NerveDopamineAppetiteFlavor conditioningFood intakeSatietySugarVagus nerve

Identifiers

PMID28007490
PMCPMC5776705

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.