Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28725282›Full record

ArticleNeuroethics2017

Addiction and the Brain: Development, Not Disease.

Marc Lewis

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neuroethics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
11.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 189 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Neuroimaging Biomarkers in Addiction.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Willpower with and without effort.The Behavioral and brain sciences · 2020
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. A Neurobehavioral Approach to Addiction: Implications for the Opioid Epidemic and the Psychology of Addiction.Psychological science in the public interest : a journal of the American Psychological Society · 2019
    Review
  20. Review
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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Marc LewisUniversity of Toronto, 27 King's College Circle, Toronto, ON Canada.
Canada Research Chairs · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

I review the brain disease model of addiction promoted by medical, scientific, and clinical authorities in the US and elsewhere. I then show that the disease model is flawed because brain changes in addiction are similar to those

Indexed as

AddictionDelay discountingDevelopmentDisease modelLearningNeuroplasticitySelf-organization

Identifiers

PMID28725282
PMCPMC5486526
OpenAlexW2579583215

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.