ArticleAddiction biology2026
Article in Addiction biology, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Relapse is a defining feature of substance use disorders, yet relapse risk varies widely across individuals. This variability has been linked to individual differences in incentive salience attribution to drug-related cues. We used fMRI to identify cortical and subcortical circuits underlying individual differences in incentive salience attribution among people with tobacco use disorder. Fifty daily cigarette users viewed pleasant, unpleasant, cigarette-related and neutral images during task-based fMRI and completed a resting-state scan. We extracted per-condition BOLD activity from a functionally defined extended visual region (Emotional > Neutral) and applied k-means clustering (k = 2) to derive neuroaffective profiles. Whole-brain voxelwise tests assessed Group × Content (cigarette vs. pleasant) effects. We compared groups' resting-state connectivity at the network level and for subcortical-cortical pairs. Individuals were clustered based on neuroaffective reactivity to drug-related and pleasant stimuli: The C > P profile showed larger BOLD responses to cigarette cues than to pleasant stimuli, whereas the P > C profile showed the opposite pattern. Whole-brain analyses showed significant Group × Content interactions that mirrored these profiles across left dorsolateral and medial prefrontal cortices and amygdala-hippocampal regions. At rest, individuals in the C > P profile showed weaker within-network connectivity of the frontoparietal control network (FPCN) and, in exploratory analyses, reduced FPCN-nucleus accumbens coupling. By replicating and extending prior psychophysiological work, this study identifies neuroaffective profiles that reflect the variation in incentive salience attribution central to neurobehavioral models of relapse. These findings provide convergent neurobiological markers that characterize distinct motivational pathways in substance use disorders.
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.