Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20157852›Full record

SynthesisNeuropsychology review2010

Differential effects of ecstasy on short-term and working memory: a meta-analysis.

Claire E Nulsen, Allison M Fox, Geoffrey R Hammond

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Neuropsychology review, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Clinical applications of hallucinogens: A review.Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology · 2016
    Review
  9. Legal highs: staying on top of the flood of novel psychoactive substances.Therapeutic advances in psychopharmacology · 2015
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA): current perspectives.Substance abuse and rehabilitation · 2013
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
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

3 authors.

Claire E NulsenSchool of Psychology M304, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, WA 6009, Australia. nulsec01@student.uwa.edu.au
Allison M Fox
Geoffrey R Hammond

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Quantitative analysis of studies examining the effect of ecstasy on short-term and working memory in the verbal and visuo-spatial domain was undertaken. Thirty verbal short-term memory, 22 verbal working memory, 12 visuospatial short-term memory and 9 visuospatial working memory studies met inclusion criteria. Ecstasy users performed significantly worse in all memory domains, both in studies using drug-naïve controls and studies using polydrug controls. These results are consistent with previous meta-analytic findings that ecstasy use is associated with impaired short-term memory function. Lifetime ecstasy consumption predicted effect size in working memory but not in short-term memory. The current meta-analysis adds to the literature by showing that ecstasy use in humans is also associated with impaired working memory, and that this impairment is related to total lifetime ecstasy consumption. These findings highlight the long-term, cumulative behavioral consequences associated with ecstasy use in humans.

Indexed as

HallucinogensHumansMemory, Short-TermN-Methyl-3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamineSubstance-Related DisordersHallucinogensN-Methyl-3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine

Identifiers

PMID20157852

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.