GuidelineNeurology2009
Responding to requests from adult patients for neuroenhancements: guidance of the Ethics, Law and Humanities Committee.
Guideline in Neurology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
33 citing papers in PubMed, 137 citations in OpenAlex.
- Methylphenidate produces selective enhancement of declarative memory consolidation in healthy volunteers.Psychopharmacology · 2012Trial
- Donepezil impairs memory in healthy older subjects: behavioural, EEG and simultaneous EEG/fMRI biomarkers.PloS one · 2011Trial
- Effects of modafinil and methylphenidate on visual attention capacity: a TVA-based study.Psychopharmacology · 2010Trial
- Ethical Governance Strategies for the Responsible Innovation of Neurotechnologies: A Scoping Review.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2025Article
- Public Views on Whether the Use of Pharmaceutical Neuroenhancements Should Be Allowed.Neurology · 2024Article
- Physician Perceptions of ADHD Stimulant Diversion and Misuse.Journal of attention disorders · 2020Article
- Cognitive and Performance Enhancing Medication Use to Improve Performance in Poker.Journal of gambling studies · 2016Article
- New tools for neuroenhancement - what about neuroethics?Croatian medical journal · 2016Article
- Cochlear Implantation, Enhancements, Transhumanism and Posthumanism: Some Human Questions.Science and engineering ethics · 2016Article
- The value and pitfalls of speculation about science and technology in bioethics: the case of cognitive enhancement.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2014Article
- Generating genius: how an Alzheimer's drug became considered a 'cognitive enhancer' for healthy individuals.BMC medical ethics · 2014Article
- Cosmetic neurology: the role of healthcare professionals.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2014Article
- The implications of methylphenidate use by healthy medical students and doctors in South Africa.BMC medical ethics · 2014Review
- Attitudes towards prescribing cognitive enhancers among primary care physicians in Germany.BMC family practice · 2014Article
- Comment on "Can transcranial electrical stimulation improve learning difficulties in atypical brain development? A future possibility for cognitive training" by Krause and Cohen Kadosh.Developmental cognitive neuroscience · 2013Article
- Should physicians prescribe cognitive enhancers to healthy individuals?CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2013Article
- Globalization and cognitive enhancement: emerging social and ethical challenges for ADHD clinicians.Current psychiatry reports · 2013Review
- Adderall for All: A Defense of Pediatric Neuroenhancement.HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues · 2013Article
- Emerging Therapeutic Enhancement Enabling Health Technologies and Their Discourses: What Is Discussed within the Health Domain?Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2013Article
- Navigating the enhancement landscape. Ethical issues in research on cognitive enhancers for healthy individuals.EMBO reports · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the last decade, persons who have no diagnosed medical or mental health condition are increasingly seeking and utilizing, for the ostensible purpose of enhancing their memory or cognitive skills, prescription drugs that were originally developed to improve executive function or memory in persons diagnosed with disorders such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder or Alzheimer disease. Evidence suggests that this practice, now known as neuroenhancement, is gathering momentum. As a result, neurologists may be encountering patients without a diagnosed illness asking for medications with the goal of improving their memory, cognitive focus, or attention span. Strong arguments have been made for and against this practice, often reflecting strongly held convictions concerning the appropriate practice of medicine. The purpose of this report is to provide neurologists with an overview of the ethical, legal, and social issues surrounding the use of pharmaceuticals prescribed to enhance or augment normal cognitive or affective functioning, as well as practical guidance for responding to an adult patient's request for neuroenhancement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.