Cited by 152Mast cells and histamineSleep and Work-Related FatigueAllergic Rhinitis and Sensitization

Sedative effects of antihistamines

Roth, T., Roehrs, T., Koshorek, G., Sicklesteel, J., Zorick, F.·1987·Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology

Abstract

The central effects of a newly developed, long-acting H1 antihistamine, loratadine (10 and 40 mg), were compared with those of a standard H1 antihistamine, diphenhydramine (50 mg three times a day) with measures of performance and daytime sleepiness (multiple sleep latency test). Sixteen healthy adults (six women and 10 men), 19 to 35 years of age, received each of the drugs and placebo for 2 days, separated by 5 days at home. Each day, the drug or placebo was administered at 8 A.M. and 12 and 4 P.M. Diphenhydramine was administered in three equal doses (50 mg), and loratadine was administered in a single dose followed by two placebo doses. Mean latency to sleep on tests done at 9 and 11 A.M. and 1, 3, and 5 P.M. was reduced significantly with diphenhydramine compared to placebo, whereas neither loratadine dose reduced sleep latency. Performance measured at 9:30 P.M. and 1:30 P.M. with a battery of tests, including reaction time, vigilance, digit symbol substitution, and symbol copying tasks demonstrated a significant reduction in symbols copied and digits substituted after diphenhydramine compared to both loratadine doses. These results demonstrate that loratadine (10 and 40 mg doses) did not have clinically significant central nervous system activity, whereas diphenhydramine increases sleepiness and disrupts performance efficiency.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0091-6749(87)80197-5

Cites

11 of 11 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?

  • The DSST could statistically significantly distinguish the cognitive effect of the H1 antagonist diphenhydramine from placebo with an effect size of 0.28.

    “The authors demonstrated that the DSST could statistically significantly distinguish the cognitive effect of the H1 antagonist diphenhydramine from placebo with an effect size of 0.28 (calculated from the published statistics).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Roth, T., Roehrs, T., Koshorek, G., Sicklesteel, J., & Zorick, F.
Venue
Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1987-07
Volume
80
Issue
1
Pages
94-98
ISSN
0091-6749 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2012513486
Cited by
151
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2
FWCI
1.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Mast cells and histamine
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and Work-Related Fatigue
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Immunology and Allergy › Allergic Rhinitis and Sensitization
Keywords
loratadine, diphenhydramine, histamine H1 receptor antagonists, sedative effects, daytime sleepiness, sleep latency, central nervous system effects, cognitive performance, reaction time, sustained attention
MeSH terms
Adult, Cyproheptadine, Diphenhydramine, Female, Histamine H1 Antagonists, Humans, Hypnotics and Sedatives, Male, Sleep, Loratadine

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