↓ Skip to main content

Psychostimulants As Cognitive Enhancers in Adolescents: More Risk than Reward?

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Psychostimulants As Cognitive Enhancers in Adolescents: More Risk than Reward?
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, September 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2017.00260
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kimberly R. Urban, Wen-Jun Gao

Abstract

Methylphenidate and other psychostimulants, originally developed to treat attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder, are increasingly abused by healthy adolescents and adults seeking an advantage in scholastic performance and work productivity. However, how these drugs may affect cognitive performance, especially in the young brain, remains unclear. Here, we review recent literature and emphasize the risks of abuse of psychostimulants in healthy adolescents and young adults. We conclude that while the desire for cognitive enhancement, particularly with rising costs of education and increasingly competitive nature of scholarship programs, is unlikely to diminish in the near future, it is crucial for the scientific community to thoroughly examine the efficacy and safety of these stimulants in healthy populations across development. The current dearth of knowledge on the dose-response curve, metabolism, and cognitive outcomes in adolescents following methylphenidate or other psychostimulant exposure may be perpetuating a perception of these drugs as "safe" when that might not be true for developing brains.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 13 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 9%
Student > Master 4 6%
Student > Postgraduate 4 6%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 27 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 17%
Neuroscience 10 14%
Psychology 8 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 6%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 29 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 October 2018.
All research outputs
#17,489,487
of 25,654,806 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#6,452
of 14,375 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#211,144
of 329,381 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#60
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,654,806 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,375 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,381 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.