Trial reportAddiction biology2025
Exploring Post-Retrieval Strategies to Reduce Drug Craving in Methamphetamine Use Disorders.
Trial report in Addiction biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Neurotransmitters in memory destabilization: An integrative perspective framed by prediction error and novelty.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Post-retrieval interventions based on memory reconsolidation have shown promise in reducing addiction-related memories. However, research on methamphetamine (MA) use, particularly in humans, remains limited. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a post-retrieval intervention paradigm in managing methamphetamine use disorder (MUD) with 46 individuals from a compulsory drug rehabilitation centre. A single-blind design was employed, with participants randomly assigned to one of three groups: (1) retrieval-no intervention, (2) retrieval-extinction and (3) retrieval-cognitive task. The study involved baseline testing, followed by memory retrieval using MA cues, and one of the three interventions during the memory reconsolidation window. The interventions were as follows: (1) no further intervention after retrieval, (2) extinction training and (3) playing Tetris after memory reactivation. Relapse was assessed through physiological and psychological indicators, with a focus on both spontaneous and cue-induced relapse of MUD memory. The results showed that both retrieval-extinction and retrieval-cognitive task showed benefits in reducing cravings and preventing relapse in MUD compared to retrieval alone. Physiological and psychological indicators of MA memory relapse showed weak correlation and differed across several dimensions. These findings suggest new strategies for MUD intervention and provide valuable insights for clinical treatment. Limitations of the study are also discussed.
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.