The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Impaired cognitive performance in drug free users of recreational ecstasy (MDMA)
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVES: Ecstasy (3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) and related congerers: MDA, MDEA) is the name given to a group of popular recreational drugs. Animal data raise concern about neurotoxic effects of high doses of ecstasy on central serotonergic systems. The threshold dose for neurotoxicity in humans is not clear and serotonin is involved in several functions including cognition. The purpose of this study was to investigate cognitive performance in a group of typical recreational ecstasy users. METHODS: A comprehensive cognitive test battery was administered to 28 abstinent ecstasy users with concomitant use of cannabis only and to two equally sized matched groups of cannabis users and non-users. The sample consisted of ecstasy users with a typical recreational use pattern and did not include very heavy users. RESULTS: Ecstasy users were unimpaired in simple tests of attention (alertness). However, they performed worse than one or both control groups in the more complex tests of attention, in memory and learning tasks, and in tasks reflecting aspects of general intelligence. Heavier ecstasy and heavier cannabis use were associated with poorer performance in the group of ecstasy users. By contrast, the cannabis users did not differ significantly in their performance from the non-users. CONCLUSIONS: The present data raise concern that use of ecstasy possibly in conjunction with cannabis may lead to cognitive decline in otherwise healthy young people. Although the nature of the emerging cognitive disturbance is not yet clear, an impairment of working memory might be the common denominator underlying or contributing to declines of performance in various tasks. The cognitive disturbance is likely to be related to the well recognised neurotoxic potential of ecstasy. The data suggest that even typical recreational doses of ecstasy are sufficient to cause neurotoxicity in humans.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
The Pharmacology and Clinical Pharmacology of 3,4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA, “Ecstasy”)
Green, A. R., Mechan, A. O., Elliott, J. M., O’Shea, E., & Colado, M. I. (2003) · Pharmacological Reviews · doi:10.1124/pr.55.3.3 · Cited by 1,272
Dose-related neurocognitive effects of marijuana use
Bolla, K. I., Brown, K., Eldreth, D., Tate, K., & Cadet, J. L. (2002) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000031422.66442.49 · Cited by 608
A review of drug use and driving: epidemiology, impairment, risk factors and risk perceptions
KELLY, E., DARKE, S., & ROSS, J. (2004) · Drug and Alcohol Review · doi:10.1080/09595230412331289482 · Cited by 438
Scott, J. C., Slomiak, S. T., Jones, J. D., Rosen, A. F. G., Moore, T. M., & Gur, R. C. (2018) · JAMA Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2018.0335 · Cited by 391
What are the specific vs. generalized effects of drugs of abuse on neuropsychological performance?
Fernández-Serrano, M. J., Pérez-García, M., & Verdejo-García, A. (2011) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2010.04.008 · Cited by 387
Metadata
- Authors
- Gouzoulis-Mayfrank, E.
- Venue
- Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2000-06-01
- Volume
- 68
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 719-725
- ISSN
- 0022-3050 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2166756269
- Cited by
- 305
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 34.86
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Impaired cognitive performance in drug free users of recreational ecstasy (MDMA). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/jnnp.68.6.719
- The paper
- Gouzoulis-Mayfrank, E. (2000). Impaired cognitive performance in drug free users of recreational ecstasy (MDMA). Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.68.6.719
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.