Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 266

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 50 of the 50 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mega-Analysis of Gray Matter Volume in Substance Dependence: General and Substance-Specific Regional Effects

Open access
Mackey, Scott, Allgaier, Nicholas, Chaarani, Bader, Spechler, Philip, Orr, Catherine, Bunn, Janice, Allen, Nicholas B., Alia-Klein, Nelly, Batalla, Albert, Blaine, Sara, Brooks, Samantha, Caparelli, Elisabeth, Chye, Yann Ying, Cousijn, Janna, Dagher, Alain, Desrivieres, Sylvane, Feldstein-Ewing, Sarah, Foxe, John J., Goldstein, Rita Z., Goudriaan, Anna E., Heitzeg, Mary M., Hester, Robert, Hutchison, Kent, Korucuoglu, Ozlem, Li, Chiang-Shan R., London, Edythe, Lorenzetti, Valentina, Luijten, Maartje, Martin-Santos, Rocio, May, April, Momenan, Reza, Morales, Angelica, Paulus, Martin P., Pearlson, Godfrey, Rousseau, Marc-Etienne, Salmeron, Betty Jo, Schluter, Renée, Schmaal, Lianne, Schumann, Gunter, Sjoerds, Zsuzsika, Stein, Dan J., Stein, Elliot A., Sinha, Rajita, Solowij, Nadia, Tapert, Susan, Uhlmann, Anne, Veltman, Dick, van Holst, Ruth, Whittle, Sarah, Wiers, Reinout, Wright, Margaret J., Yücel, Murat, Zhang, Sheng, Yurgelun-Todd, Deborah, Hibar, Derrek P., Jahanshad, Neda, Evans, Alan, Thompson, Paul M., Glahn, David C., Conrod, Patricia, Garavan, Hugh, the ENIGMA Addiction Working Group·2019·American Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Although lower brain volume has been routinely observed in individuals with substance dependence compared with nondependent control subjects, the brain regions exhibiting lower volume have not been consistent across studies. In addition, it is not clear whether a common set of regions are involved in substance dependence regardless of the substance used or whether some brain volume effects are substance specific. Resolution of these issues may contribute to the identification of clinically relevant imaging biomarkers. Using pooled data from 14 countries, the authors sought to identify general and substance-specific associations between dependence and regional brain volumes. METHOD: Brain structure was examined in a mega-analysis of previously published data pooled from 23 laboratories, including 3,240 individuals, 2,140 of whom had substance dependence on one of five substances: alcohol, nicotine, cocaine, methamphetamine, or cannabis. Subcortical volume and cortical thickness in regions defined by FreeSurfer were compared with nondependent control subjects when all sampled substance categories were combined, as well as separately, while controlling for age, sex, imaging site, and total intracranial volume. Because of extensive associations with alcohol dependence, a secondary contrast was also performed for dependence on all substances except alcohol. An optimized split-half strategy was used to assess the reliability of the findings. RESULTS: Lower volume or thickness was observed in many brain regions in individuals with substance dependence. The greatest effects were associated with alcohol use disorder. A set of affected regions related to dependence in general, regardless of the substance, included the insula and the medial orbitofrontal cortex. Furthermore, a support vector machine multivariate classification of regional brain volumes successfully classified individuals with substance dependence on alcohol or nicotine relative to nondependent control subjects. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that dependence on a range of different substances shares a common neural substrate and that differential patterns of regional volume could serve as useful biomarkers of dependence on alcohol and nicotine.

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 · 10.1176/appi.ajp.2018.17040415

Cites

50 of 50 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

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

Show all 50 references

Cited by

See all 266

Metadata

Authors
Mackey, S., Allgaier, N., Chaarani, B., Spechler, P., Orr, C., Bunn, J., Allen, N. B., Alia-Klein, N., Batalla, A., Blaine, S., Brooks, S., Caparelli, E., Chye, Y. Y., Cousijn, J., Dagher, A., Desrivieres, S., Feldstein-Ewing, S., Foxe, J. J., Goldstein, R. Z., Goudriaan, A. E., Heitzeg, M. M., Hester, R., Hutchison, K., Korucuoglu, O., Li, C.-S. R., London, E., Lorenzetti, V., Luijten, M., Martin-Santos, R., May, A., Momenan, R., Morales, A., Paulus, M. P., Pearlson, G., Rousseau, M.-E., Salmeron, B. J., Schluter, R., Schmaal, L., Schumann, G., Sjoerds, Z., Stein, D. J., Stein, E. A., Sinha, R., Solowij, N., Tapert, S., Uhlmann, A., Veltman, D., van Holst, R., Whittle, S., Wiers, R., Wright, M. J., Yücel, M., Zhang, S., Yurgelun-Todd, D., Hibar, D. P., Jahanshad, N., Evans, A., Thompson, P. M., Glahn, D. C., Conrod, P., Garavan, H., & the ENIGMA Addiction Working Group
Venue
American Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2019-02-01
Volume
176
Issue
2
Pages
119-128
ISSN
  • 0002-953X (ISSN-L)
  • 1535-7228
OpenAlex
W2895898846
Cited by
266
References
50
FWCI
20.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Mega-Analysis of Gray Matter Volume in Substance Dependence: General and Substance-Specific Regional Effects. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1176/appi.ajp.2018.17040415
The paper
Mackey, S., Allgaier, N., Chaarani, B., Spechler, P., Orr, C., Bunn, J., Allen, N. B., Alia-Klein, N., Batalla, A., Blaine, S., Brooks, S., Caparelli, E., Chye, Y. Y., Cousijn, J., Dagher, A., Desrivieres, S., Feldstein-Ewing, S., Foxe, J. J., Goldstein, R. Z., . . . the ENIGMA Addiction Working Group. (2019). Mega-Analysis of Gray Matter Volume in Substance Dependence: General and Substance-Specific Regional Effects. American Journal of Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2018.17040415

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.