Suppr超能文献

滥用药物的临床神经药理学:药物辨别与受试者报告测量的比较

Clinical neuropharmacology of drugs of abuse: a comparison of drug-discrimination and subject-report measures.

作者信息

Kelly Thomas H, Stoops William W, Perry Andrea S, Prendergast Mark A, Rush Craig R

机构信息

Department of Behavioral Science, College of Medicine, University of Kentucky, Lexington 40536-0086, USA.

出版信息

Behav Cogn Neurosci Rev. 2003 Dec;2(4):227-60. doi: 10.1177/1534582303262095.

Abstract

Advances in molecular pharmacology and behavioral science have helped elucidate the structure and function of the central nervous system and its relationship to behavior and has sparked the development of pharmacological agents that have increasingly selective and potent effects with fewer adverse side effects. The sensitivity and predictive validity of the two most commonly used methodologies for assessing the neuropharmacological effects of centrally active drugs, subject report of drug effects and drug discrimination, were examined. The sensitivity of the measures was comparable across stimulant, sedative, and opioid drugs. Results with drug-discrimination methodologies were generally consistent with hypothesized neuropharmacological mechanisms across all drug classes, whereas subject reports conformed under more limited testing conditions. Firm conclusions regarding the relative utility of drug-discrimination and subject-report measures for clinical studies of neuropharmacological mechanisms are limited by the small number of studies in which the two methodologies have been tested using identical pharmacological pretreatment manipulations.

摘要

分子药理学和行为科学的进展有助于阐明中枢神经系统的结构和功能及其与行为的关系,并催生了具有越来越高选择性和效力且副作用更少的药物制剂的开发。对两种最常用的评估中枢活性药物神经药理学作用的方法——药物作用的受试者报告和药物辨别——的敏感性和预测效度进行了检验。这些测量方法在兴奋剂、镇静剂和阿片类药物中的敏感性相当。药物辨别方法的结果在所有药物类别中总体上与假设的神经药理学机制一致,而受试者报告在更有限的测试条件下才符合。关于药物辨别和受试者报告测量方法在神经药理学机制临床研究中的相对效用的确切结论,因使用相同药理学预处理操作对这两种方法进行测试的研究数量较少而受到限制。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验