Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24344115›Full record

ReviewPharmacological reviews2014

Psychostimulants and cognition: a continuum of behavioral and cognitive activation.

Suzanne Wood, Jennifer R Sage, Tristan Shuman, Stephan G Anagnostaras

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Pharmacological reviews, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 109 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
109citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
9.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

109 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 255 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Safety and cognitive pharmacodynamics following dose escalations with 3-methylmethcathinone (3-MMC): a first in human, designer drug study.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2025
    Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

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

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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Suzanne Wood9500 Gilman Dr MC 0109, La Jolla, CA 92093-0109. stephana@ucsd.edu.
Jennifer R Sage
Tristan Shuman
Stephan G Anagnostaras
Columbia University · USUniversity of California, San Diego · US

Funding

Training in Schizophrenia and Psychotic Disorders: From Animal Models to PatientsT32MH018870 · NIMH · COLUMBIA UNIV NEW YORK MORNINGSIDE · PI Guillermo Horga, Christoph Kellendonk · 1988 to 2026
$9.8M
Molecular Cognition of AddictionR01DA020041 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI ANAGNOSTARAS, STEPHAN G · 2007 to 2011
$1.5M
Neural Correlate of Associative Memory Following Amphetamine AdministrationF31DA026259 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI WOOD, SUZANNE · 2009 to 2010
$57k
NIDA NIH HHS DA020041NIDA NIH HHS DA026259NIDA NIH HHS F31 DA026259NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA020041NIMH NIH HHS T32 MH018870
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Psychostimulants such as cocaine have been used as performance enhancers throughout recorded history. Although psychostimulants are commonly prescribed to improve attention and cognition, a great deal of literature has described their ability to induce cognitive deficits, as well as addiction. How can a single drug class be known to produce both cognitive enhancement and impairment? Properties of the particular stimulant drug itself and individual differences between users have both been suggested to dictate the outcome of stimulant use. A more parsimonious alternative, which we endorse, is that dose is the critical determining factor in cognitive effects of stimulant drugs. Herein, we review several popular stimulants (cocaine, amphetamine, methylphenidate, modafinil, and caffeine), outlining their history of use, mechanism of action, and use and abuse today. One common graphic depiction of the cognitive effects of psychostimulants is an inverted U-shaped dose-effect curve. Moderate arousal is beneficial to cognition, whereas too much activation leads to cognitive impairment. In parallel to this schematic, we propose a continuum of psychostimulant activation that covers the transition from one drug effect to another as stimulant intake is increased. Low doses of stimulants effect increased arousal, attention, and cognitive enhancement; moderate doses can lead to feelings of euphoria and power, as well as addiction and cognitive impairment; and very high doses lead to psychosis and circulatory collapse. This continuum helps account for the seemingly disparate effects of stimulant drugs, with the same drug being associated with cognitive enhancement and impairment.

Indexed as

AnimalsBenzhydryl CompoundsCaffeineCentral Nervous System StimulantsCocaineCognitionHumansMethamphetamineMethylphenidateModafinilBenzhydryl CompoundsCaffeineCentral Nervous System StimulantsCocaineMethamphetamineMethylphenidateModafinil

Identifiers

PMID24344115
PMCPMC3880463
OpenAlexW2090108889

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.