Cited by 159Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderNeuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical InnovationsNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior

Cognitive effects of methylphenidate in healthy volunteers: a review of single dose studies

Open access
Linssen, A. M. W., Sambeth, A., Vuurman, E. F. P. M., Riedel, W. J.·2014·The International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology

Abstract

Methylphenidate (MPH), a stimulant drug with dopamine and noradrenaline reuptake inhibition properties, is mainly prescribed in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, is increasingly used by the general population, intending to enhance their cognitive function. In this literature review, we aim to answer whether this is effective. We present a novel way to determine the extent to which MPH enhances cognitive performance in a certain domain. Namely, we quantify this by a percentage that reflects the number of studies showing performance enhancing effects of MPH. To evaluate whether the dose-response relationship follows an inverted-U-shaped curve, MPH effects on cognition are also quantified for low, medium and high doses, respectively. The studies reviewed here show that single doses of MPH improve cognitive performance in the healthy population in the domains of working memory (65% of included studies) and speed of processing (48%), and to a lesser extent may also improve verbal learning and memory (31%), attention and vigilance (29%) and reasoning and problem solving (18%), but does not have an effect on visual learning and memory. MPH effects are dose-dependent and the dose-response relationship differs between cognitive domains. MPH use is associated with side effects and other adverse consequences, such as potential abuse. Future studies should focus on MPH specifically to adequately asses its benefits in relation to the risks specific to this drug.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1461145713001594

Cites

105 of 105 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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 effects of tyrosine loading on working memory and information processing speed appear similar to those of methylphenidate.

    “The effects of tyrosine loading on working memory and information processing speed appear to be similar to those of methylphenidate (Linssen et al., 2014).”

    From Behavioral and cognitive effects of tyrosine intake in healthy human adults (2015) · cites this paper as Linssen et al., 2014

    The Introduction (page unavailable) says methylphenidate enhances performance on tasks measuring processing speed or working memory in healthy volunteers. It does not report effects of tyrosine loading or compare tyrosine loading with methylphenidate; the References mention tyrosine/phenylalanine depletion, which is different. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The side effects of tyrosine appear milder and less frequent than those of methylphenidate, though toxicity data on long-term use are lacking.

    “At the same time, the side effects of tyrosine appear to be milder and less frequent (Young, 1996) than those of methylphenidate (Linssen et al., 2014), though toxicity data on their long-term use are lacking.”

    From Behavioral and cognitive effects of tyrosine intake in healthy human adults (2015) · cites this paper as Linssen et al., 2014

    The Results (sections 3.3 and 3.4; page unavailable) report increased tension, heart rate, and blood pressure after methylphenidate. Our copy does not compare its side effects with tyrosine’s or address long-term toxicity, so it supports only the methylphenidate-effects portion of the claim. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Methylphenidate and amphetamine have been shown consistently to improve sustained attention in both healthy adults and youth and adults with ADHD.

    “Both methylphenidate107,108 and amphetamine109,110 have been shown consistently to improve sustained attention in both healthy adults and youth and adults with ADHD.”

    From Paying attention to attention in depression (2019) · cites this paper as [108]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 15

  1. Bond, A., Lader, M., 1974. The use of analog scales in rating subjective feelings. British Journal of Medical Psychology 47, 211-218.
  2. Coull, J.T., Frith, C.D., Dolan, R.J., Frackowiak, R.S., Grasby, P.M., 1997. The neural correlates of the noradrenergic modulation of human attention, arousal and learning. European Journal of Neuroscience 9, 589-598.
  3. Friedman, D., Johnson Jr., R., 2000. Event-related potential (ERP) studies of memory encoding and retrieval: a selective review. Microscopy Research and Technique 51, 6-28.
  4. Knecht, S., Breitenstein, C., Bushuven, S., Wailke, S., Kamping, S., Floel, A., et al., 2004. Levodopa: faster and better word learning in normal humans. Annals of Neurology 56, 20-26.
  5. Kuczenski, R., Segal, D.S., 1997. Effects of methylphenidate on extracellular dopamine, serotonin, and norepinephrine: compar- ison with amphetamine. Journal of Neurochemistry 68, 2032-2037.
  6. Levy, F., 2009. Dopamine vs noradrenaline: inverted-U effects and ADHD theories. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 43, 101-108.
  7. Lezak, M.D., 1995. Neuropsychological Assessment, 3rd ed. Oxford University Press, New York.
  8. Linssen, A.M., Riedel, W.J., Sambeth, A., 2011. Effects of tyrosine/ phenylalanine depletion on electrophysiological correlates of memory in healthy volunteers. Journal of Psychopharmacology 25, 230-238.
  9. Polich, J., 2007. Updating P300: an integrative theory of P3a and P3b. Clinical Neurophysiology: Official Journal of the Interna- tional Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology 118, 2128-2148.
  10. Polich, J., 2012. Neuropsychology of P300. In: Luck, S.J., Kappen- man, E.S. (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Event-Related Poten- tial Components. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  11. Polich, J., Criado, J.R., 2006. Neuropsychology and neuropharma- cology of P3a and P3b. International Journal of Psychophysiol- ogy: Official Journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology 60, 172-185.
  12. Schellekens, A.F., van Oosterwijck, A.W., Ellenbroek, B., de Jong, C.A., Buitelaar, J.K., Cools, L., et al., 2009. The dopamine agonist apomorphine differentially affects cognitive perfor- mance in alcohol dependent patients and healthy controls. European Neuropsychopharmacology: The Journal of the Eur- opean College of Neuropsychopharmacology 19, 68-73.
  13. Swaab, T.Y., Ledoux, K., Camblin, C.C., Boudewyn, M.A., 2012. Language-related ERP components. In: Luck, S.J., Kappenman, E.S. (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Event-Related Potential Components. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  14. van Ruitenbeek, P., Vermeeren, A., Riedel, W., 2008. Histamine H1- receptor blockade in humans affects psychomotor performance but not memory. [Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't]. Journal of Psychopharmacology 22, 663-672.
  15. Winer, J., 1971. Statistical principles in experimental design. McGraw-Hill, New York. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki , 2008.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Linssen, A. M. W., Sambeth, A., Vuurman, E. F. P. M., & Riedel, W. J.
Affiliations
Maastricht University (NL)
Corresponding author
Linssen, A. M. W.
Venue
The International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology
Published
2014-01-15
Volume
17
Issue
06
Pages
961-977
ISSN
  • 1461-1457 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-5111
OpenAlex
W2142027552
Cited by
159
References
105
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 2
FWCI
2.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Keywords
methylphenidate, cognitive enhancement, healthy volunteers, working memory, processing speed, verbal learning and memory, attention and vigilance, dose-response relationship, stimulants, cognitive side effects, abuse liability
MeSH terms
Aging, Central Nervous System Stimulants, Brain, Cognition, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Humans, Methylphenidate, Nootropic Agents, Healthy Volunteers

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