Modelling predictors of UK undergraduates’ attitudes towards smart drugs

Champagne, Jacqueline; Gardner, Benjamin; Dommett, Eleanor J.

doi:10.1016/j.tine.2019.02.001

Cited by 18 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, some studies separate marijuana or cannabis use from each other IDU [ 65 , 69 ]. Others refer to a mesh of terms e.g., neuroenhancing substances (could include coffee, energy drinks, nicotine, alcohol) or psycostimulants [ 70 ]; illicit stimulants (amphetamines, Fenethylline, Ritalin, Concerta, Dexedrine, Adderall, Vyvanse) [ 71 ]; nonmedical attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) medication [ 72 ]; illicit substances (including cocaine, designer drugs, and nonmedical use of prescription stimulants and opioids) [ 73 ]; illicit drug use, and misuse of prescription stimulants, sedatives, and opioids [ 74 ]; hallucinogen use [ 75 ]; smart drugs (aka cognitive enhancers, prescription drugs taken, either without a prescription or at a dose exceeding that which is prescribed) [ 76 , 77 ]; street drugs vs. prescription drugs [ 78 ]; or nonmedical use of prescription stimulants [ 79 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevalence and Socio-Demographic, Academic, Health and Lifestyle Predictors of Illicit Drug/s Use among University Undergraduate Students in Finland

Ansari

Salam

Suominen

2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Illicit drug/s use (IDU) among university students is a public health concern. We assessed the associations between socio-demographic, academic, and health and lifestyle characteristics (independent variables) and regular, occasional or never IDU (dependent variables). Data were collected across seven faculties (1177 students) at the University of Turku (Finland) via an online questionnaire. About 1.5% of the sample had regular IDU, 19% occasional IDU, and 79% never IDU. Independent predictors of ever (lifetime) IDU included males [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 1.82, P = 0.001], not living with parents (AOR 2.59, P < 0.001), singles (AOR 0.51, P < 0.001), lower religiosity (AOR 1.49, P = 0.022), better self-rated general health (AOR 0.41, P = 0.003), higher health awareness (AOR 1.93, P = 0.014), more depressive symptoms (AOR 1.82, P = 0.004), daily smokers (AOR 3.69, P < 0.001), heavy episodic drinking (AOR 2.38, P < 0.001) and possible alcohol dependency (AOR 2.55, P < 0.001). We observed no independent associations between ever IDU with age, study discipline, perceived stress or academic performance. The 20.5% ever IDU is concerning. The compelling independent predictors of ever IDU included not living with parents, lower religiosity, daily smokers, heavy episodic drinking and possible alcohol dependency (AOR range 2.38–3.69). Education and prevention need to emphasize the negative consequences to reinforce abstinence from IDU. Health promotion could focus on beliefs and expectations about IDU and target students at risk for successful efforts.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevalence and Socio-Demographic, Academic, Health and Lifestyle Predictors of Illicit Drug/s Use among University Undergraduate Students in Finland

Ansari

Salam

Suominen

2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One population for whom use of CE is thought to be particularly prevalent is university students, who seek to enhance functioning to improve academic performance [2,[6][7][8]. The reported prevalence of CE use among students varies markedly, ranging from 5-35% in US studies [8], 1-16% in Continental Europe [9][10][11], and 9-17% in studies of UK students [12][13][14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Perhaps unsurprisingly, studies have found users to be less concerned about the safety of CE than non-users [4,20], and perceptions of the severity of possible health risks have been inversely associated with willingness to use CE [21][22][23][24][25][26][27]. We recently demonstrated that perceived harmlessness and the belief that an individual knows enough about CE to use them safely were significant positive predictors of attitudes towards CE, which in turn predicted CE use in UK university students [12]. However, to date, no study has examined where users and non-users obtain safety information, or the accuracy of their knowledge of drug safety.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding the relationship between safety beliefs and knowledge for cognitive enhancers in UK university students

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Cognitive enhancers (CE) are prescription drugs taken, either without a prescription or at a dose exceeding that which is prescribed, to improve cognitive functions such as concentration, vigilance or memory. Previous research suggests that users believe the drugs to be safer than non-users and that they have sufficient knowledge to judge safety. However, to date no research has compared the information sources used and safety knowledge of users and non-users. Objectives This study compared users and non-users of CE in terms of i) their sources of knowledge about the safety of CE and ii) the accuracy of their knowledge of possible adverse effects of a typical cognitive enhancer (modafinil); and iii) how the accuracy of knowledge relates to their safety beliefs. Methods Students (N = 148) from King’s College London (UK) completed an anonymous online survey assessing safety beliefs, sources of knowledge and knowledge of the safety of modafinil; and indicated whether they used CE, and, if so, which drug(s). Results The belief that the drugs are safe was greater in users than non-users. However, both groups used comparable information sources and have similar, relatively poor drug safety knowledge. Furthermore, despite users more strongly believing in the safety of CE there was no relationship between their beliefs and knowledge, in contrast to non-users who did show correlations between beliefs and knowledge. Conclusion These data suggest that the differences in safety beliefs about CE between users and non-users do not stem from use of different information sources or more accurate safety knowledge.

show abstract

“…The normative changes taking place in the modern world concerning narcotic drugs, the creation of a positive image of them in numerous media, and at the same time, the weakening of the role of the family and secularization processes have been recognized as crucial determinants of the changes in attitudes towards psychoactive drugs observed today [ 6 , 35 , 36 , 37 ]. Reaching for drugs with psychoactive properties may also be conditioned by the attitudes towards such drugs acquired from the external environment; for example, the perception of drugs as safe, intelligence-enhancing, and at the same time, accessible [ 38 ].…”

Section: Mass Culture and Its Impactmentioning

confidence: 99%

Representations of Psychoactive Drugs’ Use in Mass Culture and Their Impact on Audiences

Motyka

Al-Imam

2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drug use has been increasing worldwide over recent decades. Apart from the determinants of drug initiation established in numerous studies, the authors wish to draw attention to other equally important factors, which may contribute to augmenting this phenomenon. The article aims to draw attention to the content of mass culture, especially representations of drug use in mass media, which may influence the liberalization of attitudes towards drugs and their use. The role of mass culture and its impact on the audience is discussed. It presents an overview of drug representations in the content of mass culture, e.g., in film, music, literature, and the occurrence of drug references in everyday products, e.g., food, clothes, and cosmetics. Attention was drawn to liberal attitudes of celebrities and their admissions to drug use, particularly to the impact of the presented positions on the attitudes of the audience, especially young people for whom musicians, actors, and celebrities are regarded as authorities. Indications for further preventive actions were also presented. Attention was drawn to the need to take appropriate action due to the time of the COVID-19 pandemic when many people staying at home (due to lockdown or quarantine) have the possibility of much more frequent contact with mass culture content, which may distort the image of drugs.

show abstract

Modelling predictors of UK undergraduates’ attitudes towards smart drugs

Cited by 18 publications

References 53 publications

Prevalence and Socio-Demographic, Academic, Health and Lifestyle Predictors of Illicit Drug/s Use among University Undergraduate Students in Finland

Prevalence and Socio-Demographic, Academic, Health and Lifestyle Predictors of Illicit Drug/s Use among University Undergraduate Students in Finland

Understanding the relationship between safety beliefs and knowledge for cognitive enhancers in UK university students

Representations of Psychoactive Drugs’ Use in Mass Culture and Their Impact on Audiences

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About