Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31668830›Full record

ArticleBiological psychiatry. Cognitive neuroscience and neuroimaging2020

Δ

Manoj K Doss, Jessica Weafer, David A Gallo, Harriet de Wit

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biological psychiatry. Cognitive neuroscience and neuroimaging, 2020. 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
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. ΔNeuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2020
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2021
    Article
  10. ΔBiological psychiatry. Cognitive neuroscience and neuroimaging · 2020
    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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Manoj K DossDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland; Department of Psychology, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois. Electronic address: mdoss3@jhmi.edu.
Jessica WeaferDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neuroscience, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois; Department of Psychology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky.
David A GalloDepartment of Psychology, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.
Harriet de WitDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neuroscience, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.
University of Chicago · USJohns Hopkins University · USUniversity of Kentucky · US

Funding

HUMAN BEHAVIORAL PHARMACOLOGY OF SUBSTANCE ABUSET32DA007209 · NIDA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Eric C. Strain, Elise M Weerts · 1985 to 2026
$12.9M
Determinants of Drug Preference in Humans--Administrative SupplementR01DA002812 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO · PI DE WIT, HARRIET · 1985 to 2024
$10.6M
NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA002812NIDA NIH HHS T32 DA007209
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWith the growing acceptance of cannabis use, it is crucial to understand the drug's effects on episodic memory accuracy and distortion. We investigated the impact of the administration of Δ

methodsIn a double-blind, placebo-controlled, within-subjects design, healthy infrequent cannabis users (N = 24) memorized object pictures that were superimposed over scenes (e.g., gray cat on beach) after pretreatment with placebo or THC (15 mg oral). Two days later under sober conditions, memory for the object pictures was tested by asking participants to discriminate between previously seen objects or perceptually similar lures (e.g., different gray cat). Context reinstatement was manipulated by presenting objects on their original or different scenes (e.g., beach or forest).

resultsTHC impaired memory for perceptual details of objects compared with placebo, and the context illusion was obtained in each condition: context reinstatement increased high-confidence false recognition along with correct recognition of previously seen objects. Although THC did not interact with these context effects overall, post hoc analyses showed that THC magnified the context illusion when objects were semantically congruent with their encoding contexts but abolished the context illusion when objects were incongruent with their encoding contexts.

conclusionsThese results are consistent with the hypothesis that THC impairs the encoding of specific object information more than item-context associations. As a result, THC may spare the distorting effects of context reinstatement on memory. In fact, THC may increase these distorting effects under conditions when objects are semantically congruent with context.

Indexed as

Memory, EpisodicAdolescentAdultDouble-Blind MethodDronabinolFemaleHumansMaleNeuropsychological TestsPattern Recognition, VisualPsychotropic DrugsYoung AdultDronabinolPsychotropic DrugsCannabisContext reinstatementEpisodic memoryFalse memoryMemory illusionTHC

Identifiers

PMID31668830
PMCPMC6954333
OpenAlexW2971120685

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.