ReviewAdvances in experimental medicine and biology2025
Similarities and Differences in Diagnostic Criteria.
Review in Advances in experimental medicine and biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this chapter, we compare and discuss the similarities and differences in diagnostic criteria between substance and non-substance addictions. First, several diagnostic criteria for substance addiction are introduced, focusing on widely recognized diagnostic criteria, with a comparison of their similarities and differences. Second, we outline the diagnostic criteria for several non-substance addictions, including gambling disorder, Internet addiction, food addiction, and hypersexual disorder. It is observed that both substance and non-substance addictions share many common symptoms. However, while the proposed diagnostic criteria for many non-substance addictions are currently useful for assessing the prevalence of these disorders, there is still limited validation for these criteria. Finally, we address the value of animal models in addiction research. While current animal models for studying gambling do not fully meet the established diagnostic criteria and cannot be considered valid models for gambling disorder, we introduce evolving animal models that closely resemble the diagnostic criteria for substance addiction. We also discuss two classic paradigms (i.e., self-administration and conditioned place preference) in substance addiction research. By utilizing these models, we aim to enhance the validation of animal models for gambling disorders.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41171564What 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.