JPET Introducing ALZET?ew Model 2006 Pump

Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Goodnow, R. E.
Right arrow Articles by Tagiuri, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Goodnow, R. E.
Right arrow Articles by Tagiuri, R.
Journal of Pharmacology And Experimental Therapeutics, Vol. 102, Issue 1, 55-61, 1951
Copyright © 1951 by American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics

PHYSIOLOGICAL PERFORMANCE FOLLOWING A HYPNOTIC DOSE OF A BARBITURATE

Robert E. Goodnow 1, Henry K. Beecher 1, Mary A. B. Brazier 1, Frederick Mosteller 1, and Renato Tagiuri 1

1 Anesthesia Laboratory of the Harvard Medical School at the Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts

1. The after-effects of 0.1 gram pentobarbital sodium administered by mouth were investigated by means of psycho-physiological performance tests. Four tests, representing a range of functions, Tapping Speed, Auditory Reaction Time, Naming of Opposites, and Memory for Digits, showed a significant deterioration in performance at 6:00 a.m., four hours after the barbiturate had been taken.

2. The effect observed at 6:00 a.m. diminished after breakfast but was found to continue in a highly suggestive (qualitative trend) but not statistically significant degree until after 4:00 p.m., 14 hours after medication.

3. Although previous studies had been unable to demonstrate the effects of small doses upon test performance, the present findings were made possible by controlling many of the sources of variability, by means of the experimental design and analytic procedures.

Submitted on January 19, 1951




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 ScienceHome page
H. K. Beecher
Experimental Pharmacology and Measurement of the Subjective Response
Science, August 15, 1952; 116(3007): 157 - 162.
[PDF]


Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
All ASPET Journals Molecular Pharmacology Pharmacological Reviews
Molecular Interventions Drug Metabolism and Disposition

Copyright © 1951 by the American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics.