ArticleThe American journal on addictions2020
Disentangling the Social Context of Nonmedical Use of Prescription Stimulants in College Students.
Article in The American journal on addictions, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Non-Medical Use of Prescription Stimulants in Australia: Prevalence, Sociodemographic and Substance Use Correlates From the 2022-2023 National Drug Strategy Household Survey.Drug and alcohol review · 2026Article
- Characterizing prescription stimulant nonmedical use (NMU) among adults recruited from Reddit.Addictive behaviors reports · 2021Article
- Characterizing Pathways of Non-oral Prescription Stimulant Non-medical Use Among Adults Recruited From Reddit.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesThe aim of this study was to investigate the social context of nonmedical use of prescription stimulants (NMUPS) among college students who endorsed NMUPS with co-occurring substance use disorders (SUD) compared with those without co-occurring SUDs.
methodsPresented here are new analyses based on data previously collected from college students aged 18 to 28 years derived from the Boston metropolitan area who endorsed NMUPS (N = 100) at least once in their lifetime. Differences between those with lifetime history of SUD (N = 46) and without a history of SUD (N = 54) on the Massachusetts General Hospital ADHD Medication Misuse and Diversion Assessment were analyzed using the Student t test, the Pearson χ
resultsCollege students who endorsed NMUPS with co-occurring SUD were more likely than those without SUD to have bought or traded stimulants, bought or traded in their car, used at parties with drugs/alcohol, or used intranasally (all P < .05). Intranasal administration was common (38% of all students endorsing NMUPS) and was associated with misuse at a party and simultaneous use with cocaine (P = .04), marijuana (P < .001), and alcohol (P < .001), compared with only oral use. DISCUSSION AND
conclusionsNotable characteristics were identified among individuals who engaged in NMUPS in the type, amount, cost, and ascertainment of stimulants. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: The concurrence of SUD and/or intranasal administration appear to represent a more severe phenotype of NMUPS that should be considered in the implementation of future prevention and intervention protocols on college campuses. (Am J Addict 2020;29:476-484).
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.