Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22089317›Full record

ReviewNeuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology2012

Is cognitive functioning impaired in methamphetamine users? A critical review.

Carl L Hart, Caroline B Marvin, Rae Silver, Edward E Smith

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 97 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
97citing papers in PubMed
–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

97 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Association of Cognitive Impairment and Peripheral Inflammation in Methamphetamine-dependent Patients: A Cross-sectional Study on Neuroinflammatory Markers TNF-α and IL-6.Clinical psychopharmacology and neuroscience : the official scientific journal of the Korean College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Human laboratory models of reward in substance use disorder.Pharmacology, biochemistry, and behavior · 2024
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

37 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Carl L HartDepartment of Psychology, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, USA. clh42@columbia.edu
Caroline B Marvin
Rae Silver
Edward E Smith

Funding

Intranasal Methamphetamine: A Pharmacotherapy ModelR01DA019559 · NIDA · NEW YORK STATE PSYCHIATRIC INSTITUTE DBA RESEARCH FOUNDATION FOR MENTAL HYGIENE, INC · PI HART, CARL L. · 2005 to 2009
$2.5M
NIDA NIH HHS DA-019559NIDA NIH HHS DA-03746NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA019559
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The prevailing view is that recreational methamphetamine use causes a broad range of severe cognitive deficits, despite the fact that concerns have been raised about interpretations drawn from the published literature. This article addresses an important gap in our knowledge by providing a critical review of findings from recent research investigating the impact of recreational methamphetamine use on human cognition. Included in the discussion are findings from studies that have assessed the acute and long-term effects of methamphetamine on several domains of cognition, including visuospatial perception, attention, inhibition, working memory, long-term memory, and learning. In addition, relevant neuroimaging data are reviewed in an effort to better understand neural mechanisms underlying methamphetamine-related effects on cognitive functioning. In general, the data on acute effects show that methamphetamine improves cognitive performance in selected domains, that is, visuospatial perception, attention, and inhibition. Regarding long-term effects on cognitive performance and brain-imaging measures, statistically significant differences between methamphetamine users and control participants have been observed on a minority of measures. More importantly, however, the clinical significance of these findings may be limited because cognitive functioning overwhelmingly falls within the normal range when compared against normative data. In spite of these observations, there seems to be a propensity to interpret any cognitive and/or brain difference(s) as a clinically significant abnormality. The implications of this situation are multiple, with consequences for scientific research, substance-abuse treatment, and public policy.

Indexed as

Amphetamine-Related DisordersAttentionCognitionCognition DisordersHumansMemory, Long-TermMethamphetamineMethamphetamine

Identifiers

PMID22089317
PMCPMC3260986

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.