Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36181947›Full record

ArticleBehavioural brain research2023

Prepared and reactive inhibition in smokers and non-smokers.

Kelsey E Schultz, Bryan Mantell, Elliot T Berkman, Nicole C Swann

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Behavioural brain research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Kelsey E SchultzDepartment of Biology, University of Oregon, USA; Department of Human Physiology, University of Oregon, USA; Institute of Neuroscience, University of Oregon, USA. Electronic address: Kschult7@uoregon.edu.
Bryan MantellDepartment of Psychology, University of Oregon, USA.
Elliot T BerkmanDepartment of Psychology, University of Oregon, USA; Center for Translational Neuroscience, University of Oregon, USA.
Nicole C SwannDepartment of Human Physiology, University of Oregon, USA; Center for Translational Neuroscience, University of Oregon, USA; Institute of Neuroscience, University of Oregon, USA.

Funding

Supplement to Prevention Research Center: Parenting Among Women Who Are Opioid Users, Project 2P50DA048756 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF OREGON · PI FISHER, PHILIP A, LEVE, LESLIE DIANE · 2019 to 2023
$18.0M
Construal level as a novel pathway for affect regulation and cancer controlR01CA240452 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF OREGON · PI BERKMAN, ELLIOT TODD · 2020 to 2024
$3.4M
Devaluing Energy-Dense Foods for Cancer Control: Translational NeuroscienceR01CA211224 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF OREGON · PI BERKMAN, ELLIOT TODD · 2017 to 2021
$3.2M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA211224NCI NIH HHS R01 CA240452NIDA NIH HHS P50 DA048756
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionModels of addiction have identified deficits in inhibitory control, or the ability to inhibit inappropriate or unwanted behaviors, as one factor in the development and maintenance of addictive behaviors. Current literature supports disruption of the prefrontal circuits that mediate reactive inhibitory control processes (i.e., inhibition in response to sudden, unplanned changes in environmental demands) in substance use disorders. However, the relationship between disorders of addiction, such as nicotine dependence, and planned inhibitory processes (i.e., inhibition that occurs after advance warning) is unclear. The goal of the present study was to examine the extent to which reactive and planned inhibitory processes are differentially disrupted in nicotine dependent individuals.

methodWe employed an internet-based novel stop signal task wherein participants were instructed to stop a continuous movement at either a predictable or unpredictable time. This task explicitly separated planned and reactive inhibitory processes and assessed group differences in task performance between smokers (N = 281) and non-smokers (N = 164). The smoker group was defined as any participant that identified as a smoker and reported an average daily nicotine consumption of at least 2 mg. The non-smoker group was defined as any participant that identified as a non-smoker and had not been a former smoker that quit within the last year. The smoker group also completed a questionnaire regarding smoking behaviors which included the Fägerstrom Test of Nicotine Dependence (FTND). We used these data to assess the continuous relation between planned stopping, unplanned stopping, and smoking behaviors.

resultsWe found significant differences in stop times for both reactive and planned stopping between groups as well as within the smoker group. Additionally, in the smoker group, dependence as measured by the FTND was associated with longer stop times on planned stop trials. Surprisingly, greater daily average consumption of nicotine was related to faster stopping for both trial types.

conclusionThese results indicate the relevance of measuring both reactive and planned inhibitory processes for elucidating the relationship between nicotine addiction and mechanisms of inhibitory control.

Indexed as

Tobacco Use DisorderHumansNicotineNon-SmokersReactive InhibitionSmokersNicotineMovement terminationNicotinePrepared inhibitionReactive inhibition

Identifiers

PMID36181947
PMCPMC9926641

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.