Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2010 Apr 19.
Published in final edited form as: Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2008 Jul;32(7):1113–1123. doi: 10.1111/j.1530-0277.2008.00692.x

Table 2.

Results of Subjective Measures

DRD4. L (n = 22) OPRM1.G (n = 11) Controls (n = 31)



Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
Total AUDIT score 12.80 4.95 12.11 4.70 11.10 4.90
Baseline AUQ 18.30 17.20 15.90 8.97 14.60 7.06
Postscan AUQ 19.70 5.84 15.30 8.33 17.60 7.65
Postscan AUQ minus baseline AUQ 2.19 5.62 −0.36 10.90 2.72 5.00
In-scanner alcohol urge rating (before priming) 1.60 0.51 1.50 0.63 1.63 0.66
In-scanner litchi urge rating (before priming) 1.40 0.53 1.57 0.90 1.46 0.52
In-scanner alcohol craving (after priming) 2.02 0.79 1.54 0.63 1.97 6.81
In-scanner litchi craving (after priming) 1.91 0.64 1.51 0.743 1.81 0.65
Post- minus prepriming in-scanner litchi urge rating 0.53 0.58 −0.06* 0.53 0.33 0.39
Post- minus prepriming in-scanner alcohol urge rating 0.42 0.71 0.04 0.59 0.29 0.39

Mean values and standard deviations of subjective measures for each group are summarized in this table. T-tests revealed a significant difference between OPRM1.G individuals and controls (individuals with DRD4.S and OPRM1.A genotype) in the difference score between postscan minus prescan in scanner litchi urge ratings (p < 0.05). The groups did not differ in any of the other subjective measures.

*

t = −2.457, p = 0.02.