CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 132Sleep and Work-Related FatigueSleep and Wakefulness ResearchCoffee research and impacts

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 75 of the 75 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Sustaining Executive Functions During Sleep Deprivation: A Comparison of Caffeine, Dextroamphetamine, and Modafinil

Open access
Killgore, William D. S., Kahn-Greene, Ellen T., Grugle, Nancy L., Killgore, Desiree B., Balkin, Thomas J.·2009·Sleep
DOI 10.1093/sleep/32.2.205PMC PMC2635585
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Stimulant medications appear effective at restoring simple alertness and psychomotor vigilance in sleep deprived individuals, but it is not clear whether these medications are effective at restoring higher order complex cognitive capacities such as planning, sequencing, and decision making. DESIGN: After 44 hours awake, participants received a double-blind dose of one of 3 stimulant medications or placebo. After 45-50 hours awake, participants were tested on computerized versions of the 5-Ring Tower of Hanoi (TOH), the Tower of London (TOL), and the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST). SETTING: In-residence sleep-laboratory facility at the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty-four healthy adults (29 men, 25 women), ranging in age from 18 to 36 years. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 stimulant medication groups, including caffeine, 600 mg (n=12), modafinil, 400 mg (n=12), dextroamphetamine, 20 mg (n=16), or placebo (n=14). MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: At the doses tested, modafinil and dextroamphetamine groups completed the TOL task in significantly fewer moves than the placebo group, and the modafinil group demonstrated greater deliberation before making moves. In contrast, subjects receiving caffeine completed the TOH in fewer moves than all 3 of the other groups, although speed of completion was not influenced by the stimulants. Finally, the modafinil group outperformed all other groups on indices of perseverative responding and perseverative errors from the WCST. CONCLUSIONS: Although comparisons across tasks cannot be made due to the different times of administration, within-task comparisons suggest that, at the doses tested here, each stimulant may produce differential advantages depending on the cognitive demands of the task.

Overview

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 · 10.1093/sleep/32.2.205

Cites

75 of 75 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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?

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 75 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Barcelo F, Santome-Calleja A. [A critical review of the specificity of the Wisconsin card sorting test for the assessment of prefrontal function]. Rev Neurol 2000;30:855-64.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–132 of 132

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Killgore, W. D. S., Kahn-Greene, E. T., Grugle, N. L., Killgore, D. B., & Balkin, T. J.
Affiliations
Walter Reed Army Institute of Research (US)
Corresponding author
Killgore, William D. S.
ORCID
Venue
Sleep
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2009-02
Volume
32
Issue
2
Pages
205-216
ISSN
  • 0161-8105 (ISSN-L)
  • 1550-9109
DOI
10.1093/sleep/32.2.205
PMC
PMC2635585
OpenAlex
W2250865
Cited by
132
References
75
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 16
FWCI
15.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • SLEEP (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
U.S. Department of Defense
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and Work-Related Fatigue
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Sleep and Wakefulness Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology (medical) › Coffee research and impacts
Keywords
sleep deprivation, executive function, caffeine, d-amphetamine, modafinil, stimulant medication, cognitive performance, Tower of Hanoi, Tower of London, Wisconsin Card Sorting Test, perseverative responding, planning, decision-making
MeSH terms
Modafinil, Adolescent, Adult, Central Nervous System Stimulants, Arousal, Attention, Benzhydryl Compounds, Caffeine, Cognition Disorders, Decision Making, Dextroamphetamine, Discrimination Learning, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Double-Blind Method, Female, Humans, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Problem Solving, Psychomotor Performance, Sleep Deprivation, Young Adult

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