Search

Background and Objectives: Cocaine is a highly addictive substance, and with no approved medication for cocaine use disorder (CUD), leading to a heavy burden. Despite validated psychosocial treatments, relapse rates after detoxification are very high in CUD. Few consistent factors can predict abstinence after detoxification. Our study, therefore, aimed at identifying factors predicting abstinence among CUD patients after inpatient detoxification. Methods: Eighty‐one CUD inpatients were included during detoxification and characterized for clinical and sociodemographic data at baseline and at a follow‐up of 3 months after discharge, including a standard measure of their abstinence duration from cocaine. We performed Cox univariate analyzes to determine the factors associated with abstinence maintenance, followed by a multivariate Cox regression to identify independent predictors. Results: Abstinence maintenance was shorter in patients injecting cocaine (hazard ratio [HR] = 5.16, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.01–13.27, p <.001) and using cocaine heavily in the month before inclusion (HR = 1.03, 95% CI: 1.00–1.06, p =.046). Conversely, abstinence maintenance was longer in patients with longer inpatient detoxification stays (HR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.94–0.99, p =.015) and prescribed with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) (HR = 0.30, 95% CI: 0.16–0.56, p <.001). Discussion and Conclusions: Patients with severe CUD may require longer inpatient stays to achieve abstinence. Regarding SSRI prescription, more specific studies are needed to provide stronger recommendations about their use in clinical practice. Scientific Significance: Our findings suggest several modifiable factors to improve inpatient treatment response in CUD. As there are no specific recommendations about the optimal duration of inpatient stay, our results could pave the way for evidence‐based guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

General cognitive ability ("g") does not explain sex differences in academic test performance by the end of compulsory education. Instead, individual differences in specific reasoning abilities, after removing the effects of "g," may contribute to the observed gender gaps. Associations between general or specific cognitive abilities, sex, and educational attainments were analysed in a cross-sectional study of 11-year-olds (M = 133.5 months, SD = 3.5), at an age before substantive gender-related selection-bias occurred. The 178,599 pupils (89,545 girls and 89,054 boys) attending English state schools represented 93% of the UK's local education authorities. In 2004 each student completed the Cognitive Abilities Test-Third Edition (CAT3), assessing verbal, quantitative, and nonverbal reasoning abilities. These data were linked to each child's attainment scores on national Key Stage 2 tests in English, mathematics and science. A sex difference in "g," favoring girls, was statistically significant but of negligible effect size (Cohen's d = 0.01). Girls scored 26% of a "SD" higher than boys on a verbal residual factor, and boys scored 28% of a "SD" higher than girls on a quantitative residual factor, with negligible sex differences on a nonverbal residual factor (1% of a SD). In education, 10% more girls than boys achieved UK government targets in English. In mathematics and science, sex differences were less apparent at the government target grade (Level 4), although a 5% greater proportion of boys than girls performed at the highest level in mathematics (Level 5). General cognitive ability ("g") was strongly related to an educational factor score (r = 0.83) as expected, and did not explain sex differences in academic performance. In general linear models, a verbal residual factor explained up to 29% of girls' higher English attainment, and better quantitative skills among boys explained 50% of their higher attainment in mathematics. Besides the significant contributions of specific cognitive abilities to gender differences in English and mathematics, there remains substantive variance of the educational gender gap left to explain. (Contains 5 tables and 1 figure.)

Hunger is defined as a strong desire or need for food while satiety is the condition of being full or gratified. The maintenance of energy homeostasis requires a balance between energy intake and energy expenditure. The regulation of food intake is a complex behavior. It requires discrete nuclei within the central nervous system (CNS) to detect signals from the periphery regarding metabolic status, process and integrate this information in a coordinated manner and to provide appropriate responses to ensure that the individual does not enter a state of positive or negative energy balance. This review of hunger and satiety will examine the CNS circuitries involved in the control of energy homeostasis as well as signals from the periphery, both hormonal and neural, that convey pertinent information regarding short-term and long-term energy status of the individual.

This 5-year prospective longitudinal study of 70,000+ English children examined the association between psychometric intelligence at age 11 years and educational achievement in national examinations in 25 academic subjects at age 16. The correlation between a latent intelligence trait (Spearman's "g"from CAT2E) and a latent trait of educational achievement (GCSE scores) was 0.81. General intelligence contributed to success on all 25 subjects. Variance accounted for ranged from 58.6% in Mathematics and 48% in English to 18.1% in Art and Design. Girls showed no advantage in "g", but performed significantly better on all subjects except Physics. This was not due to their better verbal ability. At age 16, obtaining five or more GCSEs at grades A*-C is an important criterion. 61% of girls and 50% of boys achieved this. For those at the mean level of g at age 11, 58% achieved this; a standard deviation increase or decrease in g altered the values to 91% and 16%, respectively.

Background and aims: There is uncertainty about the extent or even existence of sex differences in the mean and variability of reasoning test scores ( Jensen, 1998; Lynn, 1994, ; Mackintosh, 1996). This paper analyses the Cognitive Abilities Test (CAT) scores of a large and representative sample of UK pupils to determine the extent of any sex differences. Sample: A nationally representative UK sample of over 320,000 school pupils aged 11-12 years was assessed on the CAT (third edition) between September 2001 and August 2003. The CAT includes separate nationally standardized tests for verbal, quantitative, and non-verbal reasoning. The size and recency of the sample is unprecedented in research on this issue. Methods: The sheer size of the sample ensures that any sex difference will achieve statistical significance. Therefore, effect sizes (d) and variance ratios (VR) are employed to evaluate the magnitude of sex differences in mean scores and in score variability, respectively. Results: The mean verbal reasoning score for girls was 2.2 standard score points higher than the mean for boys, but only 0.3 standard points in favour of girls for non-verbal reasoning (NVR), and 0.7 points in favour of boys for quantitative reasoning (QR). However, for all three tests there were substantial sex differences in the standard deviation of scores, with greater variance among boys. Boys were over represented relative to girls at both the top and the bottom extremes for all tests, with the exception of the top 10% in verbal reasoning. Conclusions: Given the small differences in means, explanations for sex differences in wider domains such examination attainment at age 16 need to look beyond conceptions of "ability". Boys tend to be both the lowest and the highest performers in terms of their reasoning abilities, which warns against the danger of stereotyping boys as low achievers.