SynthesisPsychopharmacology2019
The effects of licit and illicit recreational drugs on prospective memory: a meta-analytic review.
Synthesis in Psychopharmacology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Substance abuse and susceptibility to false memory formation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Pooled it
- Cognitive performance and subjective effects the morning after last use of smoked cannabis by adults who use cannabis frequently: An observational study.Drug and alcohol dependence reports · 2026Article
- Indications of alcohol or drug use disorders in five different national registers in Sweden: a cross-sectional population-based study.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Understanding the Mechanisms of Action and Effects of Drugs of Abuse.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Cognitive test performance in chronic cannabis flower users, concentrate users, and non-users.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Recreational drug use and prospective memory.Psychopharmacology · 2022Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
rationaleThere are no recent reports summarising the magnitude of prospective memory (PM) impairments in recreational drug users.
objectiveWe performed a meta-analysis of studies (with a parallel group design) examining PM performance in users of common recreational drugs (including alcohol and tobacco) who were not intoxicated during testing. Studies were also evaluated for the presence of methodological bias.
methodsTwenty-seven studies were included in the meta-analysis following literature searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO. Effect sizes (standardised mean difference; SMD) were calculated separately for the effects of alcohol, cannabis, ecstasy, methamphetamine and tobacco use. The influences of drug use and study characteristics on effect sizes were explored using meta-regressions. Sources of study bias were also assessed.
resultsHeavy drinkers and regular drug users tended to perform worse than controls on event and time-based PM tasks. Effect sizes (standardised mean differences; SMDs) for event-based PM impairment across the different drug-using groups/heavy drinkers ranged between - 1.10 and - 0.49, with no 95% CI crossing 0.00. SMDs for time-based PM ranged between - 0.98 and - 0.70. Except for the CIs associated with the ES for smokers' time-based PM performance, no CIs crossed 0.00.
conclusionsAlthough all drug-using groups showed moderate-large impairments in event and time-based PM, effect sizes had low precision and moderate-high levels of heterogeneity. In addition, several methodological and reporting issues were identified in the majority of studies. As such, considerable uncertainty remains regarding the role of confounds and the magnitude of PM impairments in non-intoxicated recreational drug users.
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.