Clinical neuropharmacology of drugs of abuse: a comparison of drug-discrimination and subject-report measures.
Clinical neuropharmacology of drugs of abuse: a comparison of drug-discrimination and subject-report measures.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1177/1534582303262095
复制
发表时间：
2003-12-01
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Rush, Craig R
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kelly, Thomas H;Stoops, William W;Rush, Craig R
分子药理学和行为科学的进步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，并激发了药物制剂的发展，这些药物具有越来越强的选择性和强大的作用，副作用更少。研究了两种最常用的评估中枢活性药物神经药理作用的方法，即药物作用的受试者报告和药物鉴别的敏感性和预测效度。测量的敏感性在兴奋剂、镇静剂和阿片类药物之间具有可比性。药物鉴别方法的结果总体上与所有药物类别的假设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符合。关于药物鉴别和受试者报告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受到少数研究的限制，在这些研究中，两种方法使用相同的药理学预处理操作进行了测试。
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.