Trial reportJournal of psychopharmacology (Oxford, England)2025
Effects of a
Trial report in Journal of psychopharmacology (Oxford, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05757050 (Evaluating the Effects of the Supplement ReFocus Tablets on Stress, Cognitive Function, Sleep and Wellbeing Following 14 Days Consumption in Healthy Volunteers Reporting Subjective Stress), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 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.
Evaluating the Effects of the Supplement ReFocus Tablets on Stress, Cognitive Function, Sleep and Wellbeing Following 14 Days Consumption in Healthy Volunteers Reporting Subjective Stress: A Randomised, Double-blind, Placebo Controlled, Crossover Trial
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChronic stress is prevalent in most societies, impairing cognition, mood, and social functioning. Research suggests that supplements containing extracts from
aimsTo investigate the acute and chronic effects of a
methodsForty-three participants (35 analysed) aged 18-75 years received the herbal supplement and a placebo for 15 days. Psychological well-being, and sleep were measured after 7 and 15 days of treatment. Cognitive performance was evaluated following a bolus dose of two tablets and after 15 days, with and without an observed multitasking stressor.
resultsThe herbal supplement significantly improved performance on a task of attention and working memory (as evidenced by a reduction in serial 3's subtraction errors) following an acute dose and improved working memory performance (an increase in the number of correct serial 7's subtraction) during the stressor, irrespective of dose. Cognitive effects were less consistent in the absence of the stressor. Chronic supplementation improved mood and anxiety, reducing total mood disturbance, anger/hostility, and Trait anxiety scores. A higher proportion of subjects experienced ⩾30% gains in social satisfaction scores after 7 days. No serious adverse effects were reported.
conclusionsThe herbal supplement is safe and enhances mood, reduces subjective anxiety, and improves cognition under stress, though cognitive effects are variable without stress exposure.The study was registered on clinicaltrials.gov (identifier: NCT05757050).
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.