Cited by 306Sleep and Work-Related FatigueCoffee research and impactsSleep and Wakefulness Research

Performance and alertness effects of caffeine, dextroamphetamine, and modafinil during sleep deprivation

WESENSTEN, NANCY J., KILLGORE, WILLIAM D. S., BALKIN, THOMAS J.·2005·Journal of Sleep Research

Abstract

Stimulants may provide short-term performance and alertness enhancement during sleep loss. Caffeine 600 mg, d-amphetamine 20 mg, and modafinil 400 mg were compared during 85 h of total sleep deprivation to determine the extent to which the three agents restored performance on simple psychomotor tasks, objective alertness and tasks of executive functions. Forty-eight healthy young adults remained awake for 85 h. Performance and alertness tests were administered bi-hourly from 8:00 hours day 2 to 19:00 hours day 5. At 23:50 hours on day 4 (after 64 h awake), subjects ingested placebo, caffeine 600 mg, dextroamphetamine 20 mg, or modafinil 400 mg (n=12 per group). Performance and alertness testing continued, and probe tasks of executive function were administered intermittently until the recovery sleep period (20:00 hours day 5 to 8:00 hours day 5). Bi-hourly postrecovery sleep testing occurred from 10:00 hours to 16:00 hours day 6. All three agents improved psychomotor vigilance speed and objectively measured alertness relative to placebo. Drugs did not affect recovery sleep, and postrecovery sleep performance for all drug groups was at presleep deprivation levels. Effects on executive function tasks were mixed, with improvement on some tasks with caffeine and modafinil, and apparent decrements with dextroamphetamine on others. At the doses tested, caffeine, dextroamphetamine, and modafinil are equally effective for approximately 2-4 h in restoring simple psychomotor performanc…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-2869.2005.00468.x

Cites

0 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
WESENSTEN, N. J., KILLGORE, W. D. S., & BALKIN, T. J.
Affiliations
Walter Reed Army Institute of Research (US)
Corresponding author
WESENSTEN, NANCY J.
Venue
Journal of Sleep Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-08-25
Volume
14
Issue
3
Pages
255-266
ISSN
  • 0962-1105 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2869
OpenAlex
W1975163395
Cited by
306
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 26
FWCI
22.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Sleep Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and Work-Related Fatigue
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Coffee research and impacts
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Sleep and Wakefulness Research
Keywords
caffeine, d-amphetamine, modafinil, sleep deprivation, stimulants, alertness, psychomotor performance, executive function, psychomotor vigilance, recovery sleep, drug elimination rate
MeSH terms
Modafinil, Adult, Central Nervous System Stimulants, Arousal, Benzhydryl Compounds, Caffeine, Cognition, Dextroamphetamine, Female, Humans, Disorders of Excessive Somnolence, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Psychomotor Performance, Sleep Deprivation, Wakefulness, Polysomnography, Dopamine Agonists

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