ReviewJournal of addiction medicine
Prescribing Psychostimulants for the Treatment of Stimulant Use Disorder: Navigating the Federal Legal Landscape.
Review in Journal of addiction medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Urgent response is needed to address the stimulant-fentanyl related overdose crisis.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Current insights into the safety and adverse effects of methylphenidate in children, adolescents, and adults - narrative review.Pharmacological reports : PR · 2025Review
- Prescribed medications for patients with amphetamine-type stimulant use disorder seen in rural-serving Pacific Northwest primary care clinics.Addiction science & clinical practice · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Stimulant use disorder (StUD) is a rapidly growing concern in the United States, with escalating rates of death attributed to amphetamines and cocaine. No medications are currently approved for StUD treatment, leaving clinicians to navigate off-label medication options. Recent studies suggest that controlled prescription psychostimulants such as dextroamphetamine, methylphenidate, and modafinil are associated with reductions in self-reported stimulant use, craving, and depressive symptoms. Despite this positive initial evidence, prescribing rates of these medications for StUD treatment remain low, possibly because some clinicians believe that they are subject to the restrictions federal law imposes on medications for opioid use disorder. This is not the case. Rather, at the federal level, these medications are subject only to the general requirement that prescriptions be issued for a legitimate medical purpose within the usual course of professional practice, criteria that are buttressed by recent national guidelines that include controlled prescription psychostimulants as an option within a comprehensive treatment plan for StUD. In this commentary, we review the federal legal landscape regarding the prescription of psychostimulants for StUD and recommend strategies for increasing the utilization of this promising approach. Professional organizations, addiction clinicians, and researchers can reinforce this practice through publishing expert recommendations, developing clinician education materials, and disseminating their real-world experiences and well-documented treatment plans.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.