The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Evidence for a Gender-Related Effect of Alcoholism on Brain Volumes
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to compare brain volumes of alcoholic and nonalcoholic men and women and determine if the magnitudes of differences in brain volumes between alcoholic women and nonalcoholic women are greater than the magnitudes of the differences between alcoholic men and nonalcoholic men. METHOD: The study group included 118 subjects: 79 inpatients 30-60 years of age who were alcohol dependent but had no clinically apparent cognitive impairment or medical illness (43 men and 36 women) and 39 healthy comparison subjects of similar age who were not alcoholic (20 men and 19 women). The volume of intracranial contents was segmented into gray matter, white matter, sulcal CSF, and ventricular CSF from a T(1)-weighted magnetic resonance image obtained after the alcoholic subjects had attained 3 weeks of sobriety. RESULTS: Alcoholic women had significantly smaller volumes of gray and white matter as well as greater volumes of sulcal and ventricular CSF than nonalcoholic women. The differences in gray and white matter volumes between alcoholic and nonalcoholic men were significant, but the significance of these differences was of a smaller magnitude than the significance of the differences between alcoholic and nonalcoholic women. Direct comparisons of alcoholic men and women showed that the proportion of intracranial contents occupied by gray matter was smaller in alcoholic women than in alcoholic men. The magnitudes of differences in brain volumes adjusted for intracranial size between alcoholic women and nonalcoholic women were greater than the magnitudes of the adjusted differences between alcoholic men and nonalcoholic men. CONCLUSIONS: These results are consistent with greater sensitivity to alcohol neurotoxicity among women.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Frezza, M., di Padova, C., Pozzato, G., Terpin, M., Baraona, E., & Lieber, C. S. (1990) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199001113220205 · Cited by 1,328
Cited by
A meta-analysis of sex differences in human brain structure
Ruigrok, A. N. V., Salimi-Khorshidi, G., Lai, M.-C., Baron-Cohen, S., Lombardo, M. V., Tait, R. J., & Suckling, J. (2014) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2013.12.004 · Cited by 1,192
Erol, A., & Karpyak, V. M. (2015) · Drug and Alcohol Dependence · doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2015.08.023 · Cited by 1,022
Alcohol: Effects on Neurobehavioral Functions and the Brain
Oscar-Berman, M., & Marinković, K. (2007) · Neuropsychology Review · doi:10.1007/s11065-007-9038-6 · Cited by 619
Hof, P. R., Haroutunian, V., Friedrich, V. L., Byne, W., Buitron, C., Perl, D. P., & Davis, K. L. (2003) · Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/s0006-3223(03)00237-3 · Cited by 433
Chanraud, S., Martelli, C., Delain, F., Kostogianni, N., Douaud, G., Aubin, H.-J., Reynaud, M., & Martinot, J.-L. (2007) · Neuropsychopharmacology · doi:10.1038/sj.npp.1301219 · Cited by 420
Metadata
- Authors
- Hommer, D. W., Momenan, R., Kaiser, E., & Rawlings, R. R.
- Venue
- American Journal of Psychiatry
- Published
- 2001-02-01
- Volume
- 158
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 198-204
- ISSN
- 0002-953X (ISSN-L)
- 1535-7228
- OpenAlex
- W2145601914
- Cited by
- 350
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 9.95
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Evidence for a Gender-Related Effect of Alcoholism on Brain Volumes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1176/appi.ajp.158.2.198
- The paper
- Hommer, D. W., Momenan, R., Kaiser, E., & Rawlings, R. R. (2001). Evidence for a Gender-Related Effect of Alcoholism on Brain Volumes. American Journal of Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.158.2.198
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.