Cited by 61Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesSchizophrenia research and treatmentTreatment of Major Depression

Cognitive toxicity of pharmacotherapeutic agents used in social anxiety disorder

Hindmarch, I.·2009·International Journal of Clinical Practice

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare cognitive impairment of medications used in social anxiety disorder (SAD). METHODS: Data from peer-reviewed publications (1975-2007) of controlled, crossover design, pharmacodynamic studies on SAD medications in healthy volunteers were analysed. The number of objective psychometrics for each drug/dose level at all time points after dosing, and of instances of statistically significant impairment of cognitive function, enabled calculation of drug-induced cognitive impairment. The magnitude of impairment between drugs was compared using proportional impairment ratios (PIRs). RESULTS: Olanzapine, oxazepam, lorazepam and mianserin had twice the average cognitive toxicity of other treatments. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) impaired cognition to a lesser extent than other pharmacological groupings. There was extensive intra-class variation: fluvoxamine (PIR = 0.08) possessed little detrimental cognitive activity, whereas sertraline (PIR = 5.33) caused impairment over five times the SSRI group average. Benzodiazepines caused noticeable cognitive impairment. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial differences exist, both between and within therapeutic classes, in the behavioural toxicity of medications used for SAD.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2009.02085.x

Cites

103 of 103 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?

  • A past affective or psychotic episode is the best predictor of a similar illness being precipitated by a medical drug.

    “Whitlock [29], in a review published the following year, noted that the past history of an affective or psychotic episode was the best predictor of a similar illness being precipitated by a particular medical drug.”

    From Iatrogenic Factors in Psychopathology (2019) · cites this paper as [29]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

7 of the 110 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hindmarch, I.
Affiliations
University of Surrey (GB)
Corresponding author
Hindmarch, I.
Venue
International Journal of Clinical Practice
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-07
Volume
63
Issue
7
Pages
1085-1094
ISSN
  • 1368-5031 (ISSN-L)
  • 1742-1241
OpenAlex
W1965515292
Cited by
61
References
110
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 6
FWCI
1.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Clinical Practice (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
Keywords
social anxiety disorder, cognitive impairment, pharmacotherapy, olanzapine, oxazepam, lorazepam, mianserin, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, sertraline, fluvoxamine, benzodiazepines, pharmacodynamics
MeSH terms
Antidepressive Agents, Benzodiazepines, Cognition Disorders, Female, Humans, Male, Phobic Disorders, Psychomotor Disorders, Anti-Anxiety Agents, Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors

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