Cited by 433Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorNeuropeptides and Animal PhysiologyNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 131 of the 131 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Understanding opioid reward

Open access
Fields, Howard L., Margolis, Elyssa B.·2015·Trends in Neurosciences

Abstract

Opioids are the most potent analgesics in clinical use; however, their powerful rewarding properties can lead to addiction. The scientific challenge is to retain analgesic potency while limiting the development of tolerance, dependence, and addiction. Both rewarding and analgesic actions of opioids depend upon actions at the mu opioid (MOP) receptor. Systemic opioid reward requires MOP receptor function in the midbrain ventral tegmental area (VTA) which contains dopaminergic neurons. VTA dopaminergic neurons are implicated in various aspects of reward including reward prediction error, working memory, and incentive salience. It is now clear that subsets of VTA neurons have different pharmacological properties and participate in separate circuits. The degree to which MOP receptor agonists act on different VTA circuits depends upon the behavioral state of the animal, which can be altered by manipulations such as food deprivation or prior exposure to MOP receptor agonists.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.tins.2015.01.002

Cites

131 of 131 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 433

Metadata

Authors
Fields, H. L., & Margolis, E. B.
Affiliations
University of California, San Francisco (US)
Corresponding author
Fields, Howard L.
Venue
Trends in Neurosciences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-04
Volume
38
Issue
4
Pages
217-225
ISSN
0166-2236 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2035419353
Cited by
432
References
131
Citations by year
2026: 23 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 93 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 50 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 15
FWCI
3.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Trends in Neurosciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA029776)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuropeptides and Animal Physiology
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Keywords
opioid reward, mu-opioid receptor, ventral tegmental area, dopaminergic neurons, opioid use disorder, analgesia, reward prediction error, incentive salience, working memory, behavioral state, food deprivation, opioid tolerance
MeSH terms
Analgesics, Opioid, Animals, Humans, Receptors, Opioid, Reinforcement, Psychology, Reward, Receptors, Opioid, mu, Ventral Tegmental Area, Dopaminergic Neurons

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review