Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33312267›Full record

ArticleNeuroethics2019

Pharmacological cognitive enhancement: Examining the ethical principles guiding college students' abstention.

Niloofar Bavarian, Stephanie Sumstine, Jocelyne Mendez, Kyle Yomogida, Wilma Figueroa, Cammie Lam

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neuroethics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

6 authors.

Niloofar BavarianHealth Science Department, California State University, Long Beach, Long Beach, CA 90840, U.S.A., , , Niloofar.Bavarian@csulb.edu.
Stephanie SumstineUCLA Global Center for Children and Families, University of California, Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA 90095 U.S.A.
Jocelyne MendezHealth Science Department, California State University, Long Beach Long Beach, CA 90840 U.S.A.
Kyle YomogidaHealth Science Department, California State University, Long Beach Long Beach, CA 90840 U.S.A.
Wilma FigueroaHealth Science Department, California State University, Long Beach Long Beach, CA 90840 U.S.A.
Cammie LamHealth Science Department, California State University, Long Beach Long Beach, CA 90840 U.S.A.

Funding

CSULB Building Biomedical Research Program: Overall ComponentUL1GM118979 · NIGMS · CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY LONG BEACH · PI CHUN, CHI-AH, DILLON, JESSE · 2015 to 2023
$20.7M
CSULB Building Biomedical Research Program: Student Training CoreTL4GM118980 · NIGMS · CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY LONG BEACH · PI CHUN, CHI-AH, DILLON, JESSE · 2015 to 2023
$12.3M
CSULB Building Biomedical Research Program: Research Enrichment CoreRL5GM118978 · NIGMS · CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY LONG BEACH · PI CHUN, CHI-AH, DILLON, JESSE · 2015 to 2023
$7.3M
NIGMS NIH HHS RL5 GM118978NIGMS NIH HHS TL4 GM118980NIGMS NIH HHS UL1 GM118979
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo understand the ethical principles guiding college students' abstention from pharmacological cognitive enhancement (PCE), and to determine the correlates associated with endorsing different principles.

designOne-stage cluster sampling was used to implement a paper-based survey among undergraduate students attending one university in the U.S. Thematic analysis was used to explore the ethical principles guiding PCE abstention. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to examine sociodemographic correlates associated with endorsed ethical principles.

participantsOf the 499 eligible students who completed the survey (student response proportion: 94.7%), 259 students had a negative attitude towards PCE, did not engage in PCE,

resultsThe thematic analysis resulted in the identification of eight themes, with respondents often endorsing more than one theme per response. The three themes most endorsed were non-malfeasance (i.e., avoiding PCE to prevent harm), disapproval of drugs (i.e., a moral opposition to substance use) and dosage beneficence (i.e., adhering to dosage guidance to promote health). The sociodemographic correlates associated with endorsing each theme varied across themes.

conclusionsStudents abstain from PCE for a multitude of reasons, many of which are guided by ethical principles. These findings may be incorporated into future prevention programming messages.

Indexed as

Cognitive enhancementethicsyoung adults

Identifiers

PMID33312267
PMCPMC7730911

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.