↓ Skip to main content

Mitigating risks of students use of study drugs through understanding motivations for use and applying harm reduction theory: a literature review

Overview of attention for article published in Harm Reduction Journal, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
14 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
205 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Mitigating risks of students use of study drugs through understanding motivations for use and applying harm reduction theory: a literature review
Published in
Harm Reduction Journal, October 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12954-017-0194-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dor David Abelman

Abstract

As postsecondary students' use of "study drugs" becomes more popular with increasingly reported negative effects on health and academic performance, failing prohibitionist policies to reduce consumption, and ambiguity in literature towards best practices to address this population, we present a literature review that seeks effective solutions educational institutions can apply to improve outcomes for students who use drugs. Motivations for use, effects of the substances, an analysis of efforts to control use from educational institutions, and suggestions on promoting most effective outcomes based on harm reduction, are described. Theory, quantitative, and qualitative works from systematic reviews, cohort studies, and epidemiological assessments are examined on the "study drugs" methylphenidate, dextroamphetamine, and amphetamine, also known as Adderall, Ritalin, Focalin, and Concerta. There is a focus on postsecondary students ages 18-25 in North America. Results show important risk factors for drug use including low perceived self-efficacy or enjoyment in courses, poor accommodation of special needs, reliance on external validation, having a low GPA, and experiencing a mental health issue. There is much misconception on the health and academic effects of these drugs in literature, among students, and on online knowledge sources. We suggest these drugs do not improve GPA and learning, while they might temporarily increase memory, but with detrimental negative health effects. Campaigns that address underlying factors of use can be most successful in mitigating harms.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 205 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 205 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 40 20%
Student > Master 26 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 9%
Researcher 15 7%
Other 8 4%
Other 25 12%
Unknown 72 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 30 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 26 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 7%
Social Sciences 14 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 3%
Other 35 17%
Unknown 78 38%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 December 2021.
All research outputs
#3,508,249
of 21,415,362 outputs
Outputs from Harm Reduction Journal
#440
of 852 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,055
of 298,024 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Harm Reduction Journal
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,415,362 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 852 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.9. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 298,024 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them