ArticleAddictive behaviors reports2025
Association of behavioral economic demand for kratom with DSM-5 use disorder: quantity and likelihood-based demand approaches.
Article in Addictive behaviors reports, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: Kratom products have increased in popularity in the United States due to their availability and their purported analgesic and stimulatory properties. We sought to examine if behavioral economic demand procedures widely used in addiction science would identify indicators of problematic kratom use and to evaluate the relative performance of differing demand approaches. Methods: Respondents with a lifetime history of kratom use (N = 117) completed two versions of a hypothetical kratom purchase task. The first version ("Quantity") followed typical purchase task methods; respondents were asked how much kratom they would purchase across various prices. The second version ("Likelihood") asked how likely respondents would be to purchase a single dose of kratom across the same price range. Logistic regression was used to determine the association of demand indices with the likelihood of meeting KUD criteria. Results: For the Quantity version, higher demand intensity (OR = 2.16, Conclusions: This study is the first to demonstrate that purchase tasks can quantify the reinforcing efficacy of kratom and emphasizes the temporal specificity of the association between purchase tasks and problem behaviors. These findings also suggest that demand indices from Quantity- and Likelihood-based tasks differentially relate to KUD, emphasizing the importance of task and outcome selection.
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.