Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29675039›Full record

ReviewNeural plasticity2018

The Role of Cell Adhesion Molecule Genes Regulating Neuroplasticity in Addiction.

Dawn E Muskiewicz, George R Uhl, F Scott Hall

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neural plasticity, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Genetic pleiotropy differentially linking brain variation to cannabis use and cannabis use disorder.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Trans-synaptic modulation of cholinergic circuits tunes opioid reinforcement.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Modulation of Neural Networks by Interleukin-1.Brain plasticity (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2021
    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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Dawn E MuskiewiczDepartment of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, University of Toledo College of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA.
George R UhlMolecular Neurobiology Branch, National Institute on Drug Abuse, Intramural Research Program, Baltimore, MD, USA.
F Scott HallDepartment of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, University of Toledo College of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0822-4063
University of Toledo · USNational Institute on Drug Abuse · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A variety of genetic approaches, including twin studies, linkage studies, and candidate gene studies, has established a firm genetic basis for addiction. However, there has been difficulty identifying the precise genes that underlie addiction liability using these approaches. This situation became especially clear in genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of addiction. Moreover, the results of GWAS brought into clarity many of the shortcomings of those early genetic approaches. GWAS studies stripped away those preconceived notions, examining genes that would not previously have been considered in the study of addiction, consequently creating a shift in our understanding. Most importantly, those studies implicated a class of genes that had not previously been considered in the study of addiction genetics: cell adhesion molecules (CAMs). Considering the well-documented evidence supporting a role for various CAMs in synaptic plasticity, axonal growth, and regeneration, it is not surprising that allelic variation in CAM genes might also play a role in addiction liability. This review focuses on the role of various cell adhesion molecules in neuroplasticity that might contribute to addictive processes and emphasizes the importance of ongoing research on CAM genes that have been implicated in addiction by GWAS.

Indexed as

Genetic Predisposition to DiseaseAnimalsBehavior, AddictiveCell Adhesion Molecules, NeuronalGenotypeHumansNeuronal PlasticityNeuronsPhenotypePolymorphism, Single NucleotideCell Adhesion Molecules, Neuronal

Identifiers

PMID29675039
PMCPMC5838467
OpenAlexW2793494071

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.