Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29855660›Full record

Trial reportPsychopharmacology2018

Drug liking and wanting, not impulsive action or reflection is increased by 4-fluoroamphetamine.

K P C Kuypers, E B de Sousa Fernandes Perna, P C Dolder, S W Toennes, E L Theunissen, N L Mason, N R P W Hutten, J G Ramaekers

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Psychopharmacology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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
  2. Trial
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

K P C KuypersDepartment of Neuropsychology and Psychopharmacology, Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, P. O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, the Netherlands. k.kuypers@maastrichtuniversity.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7634-3809
E B de Sousa Fernandes PernaDepartment of Neuropsychology and Psychopharmacology, Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, P. O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
P C DolderDepartment of Neuropsychology and Psychopharmacology, Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, P. O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
S W ToennesDepartment of Forensic Toxicology, Institute of Legal Medicine, Goethe University of Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany.
E L TheunissenDepartment of Neuropsychology and Psychopharmacology, Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, P. O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
N L MasonDepartment of Neuropsychology and Psychopharmacology, Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, P. O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
N R P W HuttenDepartment of Neuropsychology and Psychopharmacology, Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, P. O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
J G RamaekersDepartment of Neuropsychology and Psychopharmacology, Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, P. O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Maastricht University · NLGoethe University Frankfurt · DE

Funding

Directorate-General for Justice HOME/2014/JDRF/AG/DRUG/7082
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNew psychoactive substances (NPS) are chemical analogues designed to mimic the effects of various classic recreational drugs of abuse including MDMA, LSD, and cannabis. NPS use is associated with concern about the acute and longer-term effects particular substances might have, with abuse and addiction as potential consequences. Impulsivity and sensitivity to the rewarding effects of drugs have been considered as risk factors for drug abuse. In light of the popularity of 4-fluoroamphetamine (4-FA), it is important to assess whether 4-FA can lead to subjective drug liking and wanting, and impulsive behavior, all factors contributing to the abuse likelihood of a substance.

methodsA placebo-controlled 2-way crossover study in 12 healthy poly-drug using participants was conducted to test subjective and behavioral effects of 4-FA (100 mg). 4-FA concentrations were determined in serum up to 12 h after administration and two impulsivity tasks and two drug experience questionnaires assessing drug liking and wanting, and good and bad drug effect, were administered between 1 and 11 h post-administration.

resultsFindings showed that 4-FA did not affect impulsive behavior. Self-ratings of drug liking and wanting and good drug effect were increased 1 h after administration; this effect was absent 11 h after drug intake. DISCUSSION AND

conclusionTo conclude, 4-FA (single dose) increased self-rated liking and wanting, which is known to contribute to the abuse likelihood of a substance; however, it left another factor impulsive behavior unaffected. It has to be noted that the current picture is limited and might change with increased sample size, and/or different 4-FA doses. CLINICAL

trial registrationTrial acronym: 4-FA. URL: http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=6164 . Registration number: NTR6164 (Dutch clinical trial registry number).

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAmphetaminesBehavior, AddictiveCentral Nervous System StimulantsCross-Over StudiesDouble-Blind MethodEmotionsFemaleHumansIllicit DrugsImpulsive BehaviorMaleRewardRisk FactorsYoung Adult4-fluoroamphetamineAmphetaminesCentral Nervous System StimulantsIllicit Drugs4-FADrug likingDrug wantingGood drug effectImpulsive actionImpulsive reflection

Identifiers

PMID29855660
PMCPMC6061712
OpenAlexW2805068197

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.