Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17672383›Full record

Trial reportCognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience2007

Differential effects of scopolamine and lorazepam on working memory maintenance versus manipulation processes.

Miriam Z Mintzer, Roland R Griffiths

Open access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The effect of scopolamine on memory and attention: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Galantamine improves sustained attention in chronic cocaine users.Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology · 2011
    Trial
  6. Preclinical animal anxiety research - flaws and prejudices.Pharmacology research & perspectives · 2016
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Miriam Z MintzerDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Behavioral Biology Research Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland 21224, USA. mmintzer@jhmi.edu
Roland R Griffiths
Johns Hopkins University · US

Funding

Human Clinical Pharmacology of Emerging Drugs of Abuse (Club Drugs)R01DA003889 · NIDA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI GRIFFITHS, ROLAND R · 1985 to 2017
$7.6M
Benzodiazepine Use/Abuse: Effects on Memory MechanismsR01DA011936 · NIDA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI MINTZER, MIRIAM Z. · 1999 to 2008
$1.9M
NIDA NIH HHS DA-03889NIDA NIH HHS DA-11936
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Between-study comparisons of benzodiazepine and anticholinergic drugs on working memory suggest that anticholinergics may produce greater impairment in maintenance processes, whereas benzodiazepines may produce greater impairment in manipulation processes. This study directly compared acute effects ofthe benzodiazepine lorazepam (1.0 and 2.0 mg/70 kg, orally administered) and the anticholinergic scopolamine (0.25 and 0.50 mg/70 kg, subcutaneously administered) on working memory maintenance (storage and rehearsal) and manipulation processes in a placebo-controlled, double-dummy, double-blind, crossover design in 20 healthy volunteers. Using a modified Sternberg paradigm, storage, rehearsal, and manipulation processes were parametrically manipulated by varying memory load, delay between stimulus presentation and test, and number of operations performed on the letter strings, respectively, while controlling for drug effects on nonmemory processes. As predicted, the results suggested greater impairment in maintenance processes (rehearsal) with scopolamine than with lorazepam and greater impairment in manipulation processes with lorazepam than with scopolamine. In addition, the results suggested greater overall slowing of working memory processes with lorazepam.

Indexed as

AdultAnalysis of VarianceAnti-Anxiety AgentsDose-Response Relationship, DrugDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansLorazepamMaleMemory, Short-TermMuscarinic AntagonistsNeuropsychological TestsPsychomotor PerformanceReaction TimeScopolamineTime FactorsAnti-Anxiety AgentsLorazepamMuscarinic AntagonistsScopolamine

Identifiers

PMID17672383
OpenAlexW1980677438

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.