ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2022
Cognitive network reconstruction in individuals who use opioids compared to those who do not: Topological analysis of cognitive function through graph model and centrality measures.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Measurement of Impulsivity and Its Role in Drug Use Behaviours and Related Health, Harm and Treatment Outcomes Among People Who Use Illicit Drugs-A Scoping Review.International journal of mental health and addiction · 2026Article
- When the Mind Cannot Shift: Cognitive Flexibility Impairments in Methamphetamine-Dependent Individuals.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Assessing the attentional demand: improvements to the experimental protocol and possible learning effects.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Different topological patterns in structural covariance networks between high and low delay discounters.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Cognitive dysfunction related to opioid use disorder (OUD) requires investigation of the interconnected network of cognitive domains through behavioral experiments and graph data modeling. Methods: We conducted n-back, selective and divided attention, and Wisconsin card sorting tests and reconstructed the interactive cognitive network of subscales or domains for individuals who use opioids and controls to identify the most central cognitive functions and their connections using graph model analysis. Each two subscales with significant correlations were connected by an edge that incorporated in formation of interactive networks. Each network was analyzed topologically based on the betweenness and closeness centrality measures. Results: Results from the network reconstructed for individuals who use opioids show that in the divided attention module, reaction time and number of commission errors were the most central subscales of cognitive function. Whereas in controls, the number of correct responses and commission errors were the most central cognitive measure. We found that the subscale measures of divided attention module are significantly correlated with those of other tests. These findings corroborate that persons who use opioids show impaired divided attention as higher reaction time and errors in performing tasks. Divided attention is the most central cognitive function in both OUD subjects and controls, although differences were observed between the two groups in various subscales. Discussion: Although equal proportions of males and females may be used in future studies, divided attention and its subscales may be the most promising target for cognitive therapies, treatments and rehabilitation as their improvement can enhance overall cognitive domain performance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.