Evidence mapPaperPMID 29080906Full record

Trial reportPsychopharmacology2018

The 5-HT

Jason M Thomas, Colin T Dourish, Jeremy Tomlinson, Zaki Hassan-Smith, Peter C Hansen, Suzanne Higgs

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Psychopharmacology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. An Update on the Implications of New Psychoactive Substances in Public Health.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jason M ThomasSchool of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.
Colin T DourishP1vital, Manor House, Howbery Park, Wallingford, Oxfordshire, OX10 8BA, UK.
Jeremy TomlinsonOxford Centre for Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolism, Oxford NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Churchill Hospital, University of Oxford, Headington, OX7 3LJ, UK.
Zaki Hassan-SmithCentre for Endocrinology, School of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TH, UK.
Peter C HansenSchool of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.
Suzanne HiggsSchool of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK. s.higgs.1@bham.ac.uk.
University of Birmingham · GBAston University · GBChurchill Hospital · GB

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/G016739/1Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/N008847/1Medical Research Council MR/P011462/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

rationaleBrain 5-HT

objectivesThe present study examined the effects of the 5-HT

methodsIn a double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover design, participants were randomized immediately after screening to receive oral mCPP (30mg) in a single morning dose, or placebo, in a counterbalanced order. Test foods were served from a Universal Eating Monitor (UEM) that measured eating rate and fMRI BOLD signals to the sight of food and non-food images were recorded.

resultsmCPP decreased rated appetite and intake of a palatable snack eaten in the absence of hunger but had no significant effect on the consumption of a pasta lunch (although pasta eating rate was reduced). mCPP also decreased BOLD fMRI responses to the sight of food pictures in areas of reward-associated circuitry. A post hoc analysis identified individual variability in the response to mCPP (exploratory responder-non-responder analysis). Some participants did not reduce their cookie intake after treatment with mCPP and this lack of response was associated with enhanced ratings of cookie pleasantness and enhanced baseline BOLD responses to food images in key reward and appetite circuitry.

conclusionsThese results suggest that 5-HT

Indexed as

AdultAnalysis of VarianceAppetiteBrainDouble-Blind MethodEatingEmotionsFemaleHumansHungerHydrocortisoneHypothalamusMagnetic Resonance ImagingMiddle AgedPhotic StimulationPiperazines1-(3-chlorophenyl)piperazineHydrocortisonePiperazinesPro-OpiomelanocortinReceptor, Serotonin, 5-HT2CSerotonin 5-HT2 Receptor Agonists5-HT2CBOLD fMRIFood consumption

Identifiers

PMID29080906
PMCPMC5748416
OpenAlexW2766780933

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.