Cited by 352Neuroendocrine regulation and behaviorOlfactory and Sensory Function StudiesStress Responses and Cortisol

A review of safety, side-effects and subjective reactions to intranasal oxytocin in human research

MacDonald, Elayne, Dadds, Mark R., Brennan, John L., Williams, Katrina, Levy, Florence, Cauchi, Avril J.·2011·Psychoneuroendocrinology

Abstract

Background Human research investigating the impact of intranasal oxytocin on psychological processes has accelerated over the last two decades. No review of side effects, subjective reactions and safety is available. Method A systematic review of 38 randomised controlled trials conducted between 1990 and 2010 that investigated the central effects of intranasal oxytocin was undertaken. A systematic search for reports of adverse reactions involving intranasal oxytocin was also completed. Results Since 1990, research trials have reported on N=1529 (79% male) of which 8% were participants with developmental or mental health difficulties. Dosages ranged from 18 to 40 IU, mainly in single doses but ranged up to 182 administrations. Diverse methods have been used to screen and exclude participants, monitor side effects and subject reactions. Side effects are not different between oxytocin and placebo and participants are unable to accurately report on whether they have received oxytocin and placebo. Three case reports of adverse reactions due to misuse and longer-term use of intranasal oxytocin were reported. Conclusions The evidence shows that intranasal oxytocin: (1) produces no detectable subjective changes in recipients, (2) produces no reliable side-effects, and (3) is not associated with adverse outcomes when delivered in doses of 18-40 IU for short term use in controlled research settings. Future research directions should include a focus on the dosage and duration of use, and application with younger age groups, vulnerable populations, and with females.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2011.02.015

Cites

69 of 69 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

4 of the 73 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
MacDonald, E., Dadds, M. R., Brennan, J. L., Williams, K., Levy, F., & Cauchi, A. J.
Affiliations
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
  • Royal Children's Hospital (AU)
Corresponding author
Dadds, Mark R.
Venue
Psychoneuroendocrinology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-09
Volume
36
Issue
8
Pages
1114-1126
ISSN
0306-4530 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2057967199
Cited by
352
References
73
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 32 · 2016: 26 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 34 · 2013: 33 · 2012: 16
FWCI
37.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychoneuroendocrinology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Neuroendocrine regulation and behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Sensory Systems › Olfactory and Sensory Function Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Behavioral Neuroscience › Stress Responses and Cortisol
Keywords
intranasal oxytocin, drug safety, adverse effects, subjective reactions, placebo effect, vulnerable populations, research ethics
MeSH terms
Administration, Intranasal, Female, Humans, Human Experimentation, Male, Mental Processes

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review