RESULTS Modafinil appears to improve reaction time ( P ≤ 0.04 ) , logical reasoning ( P ≤ 0.05 ) and problem-solving .
Across all three types of prescription stimulants , research shows improved attention with lack of consensus on whether these improvements are limited to simple versus complex tasks in varying youth population s. CONCLUSIONS The heterogeneity of the non-attention deficit hyperactivity disorder youth population , the variation in cognitive task characteristics and lack of replication of studies makes assessing the potential global neurocognitive benefits of stimulants among non-attention deficit hyperactivity disorder youth difficult ; however , some youth may derive benefit in specific cognitive domains
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Increasing prescription stimulant abuse among youth without diagnoses of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder ( ADHD ) is of concern .
The most frequently cited motive for abuse is improved academic achievement via neurocognitive enhancement .
Our aim in review ing the literature was to identify neurocognitive effects of prescription stimulants in non-ADHD youth .
Self-monitoring cognitive performance during sleep deprivation: effects of modafinil, d-amphetamine and placebo.
Self-monitoring refers to the ability to assess accurately one 's own performance in a specific environment . The present study investigated the effects of the stimulating drugs modafinil ( 300 mg ) and d-amphetamine ( 20 mg ) on the ability to self-monitor cognitive performance during 64 h of sleep deprivation ( SD ) and sustained mental work . Two cognitive tasks were investigated : a visual ( perceptual ) judgement task and a complex mental addition task . Subjects in the placebo  condition displayed marked circadian and SD effects on cognitive task performance but their self-monitoring was substantively undisturbed by SD . Subjects performing under the influence of d-amphetamine likewise displayed highly proficient self-monitoring throughout the SD period . In contrast , modafinil had a disruptive effect on self-monitoring , inducing a reliable ' overconfidence ' effect ( i.e. an overestimation of actual cognitive performance ) , which was particularly marked 2 - 4 h post-dose . Although modafinil has proven to be a safe and effective countermeasure to the effects of extensive SD on cognitive task performance , we encourage a more comprehensive underst and ing of the relation between its subjective and performance enhancing effects before the drug is recommended as a viable fatigue countermeasure
RESULTS Modafinil appears to improve reaction time ( P ≤ 0.04 ) , logical reasoning ( P ≤ 0.05 ) and problem-solving .
Across all three types of prescription stimulants , research shows improved attention with lack of consensus on whether these improvements are limited to simple versus complex tasks in varying youth population s. CONCLUSIONS The heterogeneity of the non-attention deficit hyperactivity disorder youth population , the variation in cognitive task characteristics and lack of replication of studies makes assessing the potential global neurocognitive benefits of stimulants among non-attention deficit hyperactivity disorder youth difficult ; however , some youth may derive benefit in specific cognitive domains
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Increasing prescription stimulant abuse among youth without diagnoses of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder ( ADHD ) is of concern .
The most frequently cited motive for abuse is improved academic achievement via neurocognitive enhancement .
Our aim in review ing the literature was to identify neurocognitive effects of prescription stimulants in non-ADHD youth .