Supplement evidence

095 / 575Cognition

Citicoline (CDP-choline)

View my plan →

The short answer

Raises choline metabolites and has condition-specific cognitive research, but broad nootropic benefit is unproven.

Evidence and scope: Conditional or population-specific
This status does not grade the ingredient for every goal, outcome, or person.
Important limitation: Benefit depends on the population, formulation, baseline status, and objective; results should not be generalized.
Before deciding: Key concern: Levodopa, blood-pressure medicines, pregnancy, bipolar symptoms, and insomnia require review.

01 / PRACTICAL GUIDE

Dose, absorption, and combinations

These are indication-specific reference or studied ranges—not a personalized prescription. Start with the objective, then check the form, label, medicines, and health conditions.

Reference range by objective

Cognitive-performance research250–1,000 mg/day in human studies

Reference or studied range—not a personalized prescription. The product label or a clinician may specify a different dose.

Dose source ↗

More is not automatically better. A clinician or product label may specify a different amount.

Absorption / solubilityWater-soluble

Water-soluble or readily water-dispersible. This does not mean excess is always harmless.

How it is commonly taken

May be divided; take earlier if stimulating.

Do not combine casually

Levodopa, blood-pressure medicines, pregnancy, bipolar symptoms, and insomnia require review.

Dose and use source ↗

Dose and use links lead to primary or official source material. Search links are discovery tools, not proof that every returned paper applies.

02 / EVIDENCE

What the research says

We keep supportive, mixed, negative, safety, and contextual findings together. The headline never replaces the underlying papers.

2research papers in this ledger

2unique primary studies represented

2,398unique participants represented

These are audited counts for this JIVANA collection, not search-result totals. Participants are counted once when multiple papers use the same cohort; review papers are not added again to participant totals.

Open the research timelineResearch timeline

Entries are ordered by publication year. A study period appears only when the source reports it.

2021

Mixed or qualifiedPMID 33978188 · NCT03369925

Citicoline and memory function in healthy older adults

Citicoline improved secondary episodic- and composite-memory outcomes after multiplicity correction. The trial did not establish prevention of cognitive decline or everyday functional benefit, and every author worked for the ingredient maker or its contract research organization.

Published: 2021Duration: 12 weeksn=100 participants

Study design and methods

Design: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial
Population: 100 adults aged 50–85 with age-associated memory impairment; 99 completed
Intervention: Proprietary Cognizin citicoline 500 mg/day versus placebo
Outcome: Computerized memory tests and safety measures

Funding or conflict note: Authors were employees of Kyowa Hakko Bio/Kyowa Hakko USA or Biofortis Innovation Services.

Open research record ↗

2012

Does not support the tested claimPMID 22691567 · NCT00331890

Citicoline in moderate-to-severe acute ischemic stroke

Global recovery and safety outcomes did not differ, and the trial stopped for futility. This hospital-treatment result does not directly answer supplement use for memory, but it prevents broad neuroprotection claims.

Published: 2012Duration: 6 weeks of treatment; 90-day outcomen=2,298 participants

Study design and methods

Design: International randomized, masked, multicenter placebo-controlled trial stopped for futility
Population: 2,298 adults with moderate-to-severe acute ischemic stroke
Intervention: Citicoline 1,000 mg every 12 hours intravenously for 3 days then orally to 6 weeks, versus placebo, alongside acute stroke care
Outcome: Combined neurological, disability, and activities-of-daily-living recovery at 90 days; safety

Funding or conflict note: Funded by Ferrer Grupo.

Open research record ↗

Unscreened discovery appendix—not evidence55 candidate publicationsSearch run: Aug 21, 2026

Complete for the displayed PubMed query at the search timestamp—not for all databases or every possible synonym. Candidates can be irrelevant, duplicate the same study, or report negative findings. They are never summed as evidence or participants until screened.

03 / SOURCES

Start with the source material

Official evidence overviewPubMed bounded human-evidence search Live PubMed discovery searchNational Library of Medicine

The live search is for discovery only. Search-result counts change and are not included in the audited totals above.

Recent PubMed discovery recordsDirect links to the first 12 records returned by the reproducible search. These are discovery candidates—not reviewed summaries or a count of supportive findings.

04 / EXPERT CONTEXT

Expert context—not evidence

Expert positions are dated context—not scientific evidence. They never raise the evidence status or become consensus by repetition.

No direct, source-verified endorsement is currently recorded. Research authorship or discussion alone is not treated as endorsement.