Talk:List of methylphenidate analogues

loosely analogous substances?

How would adiphenine or dicycloverine fall into these relationships? If one or the other had only one benzene and one cyclohexane (instead of one with both and the other with both of the other) I'd be tempted to include such a compound as worthy of at least a brief mention. One is a nicotinic receptor inhibitor and the other an anticholinergic deliriant, both which come close to similarly related stimulants when they diverge from their structure in one specific way to some degree or another to likewise behave functionally in such ways. Nagelfar (talk) 21:52, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Also opioids of similar structure to MPH would be interesting; see the parallel between MPH (and it's analogues) in comparison to substances such as "O-Desmethyltramadol." Even Fentanyl too, if you omit the long ethyl-phenyl branch on the piperidine ring. Nagelfar (talk) 22:58, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Also there are some "one-off" near analogues to desoxypipradrol that are dissociative anaesthetics; namely diphenidine, delucemine and traxoprodil which by extension, relate to MPH. Nagelfar (talk) 20:25, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Tolazoline and/or pyrovalerone may fall vaguely into this spectrum as well. Looking back through my molecular hybrid conceptions (having in this instance a piqued interest in certain mutual-shared affinities for differing sites), when combined in one manner, these two together seem very MPH analogish:
File:TolazolinePlusPyrovalerone.jpg
Nagelfar (talk) 00:52, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Tolcapone, save the closeness to TCAT in the way the having two benzenes makes it different as the first compounds mentioned in this talk section, but closer than those in that it is part of the monoamine overall system. Nagelfar (talk) 21:49, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

As opioids go, this one is eight times morphine, and is a tighter overlay to MPH than many of those loosely proposed ones above: doxpicomine. Nagelfar (talk) 21:15, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

• Fasoracetam:

Nagelfar (talk) 23:36, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

di-(3,4)-bromo-methylphenidate sources?

The bromo in either para or meta has higher affinity than the chloro, is there any attested source for a di-bromo-MPH anywhere? Nagelfar (talk) 23:02, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Sources for yet added analogs

DOI: 10.1016/j.bmcl.2003.12.097

(Note to self: good candidate for my image creator once through with other projects.) Nagelfar (talk) 17:36, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

DOI: 10.1002/syn.20161
DOI: 10.1021/jm0608614
I'll have to get to these. Nagelfar (talk) 16:56, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Methylphenidate impurities

1,2-Bis(carboxymethylbenzyl)piperidine, methylphenidate impurity product.

Apparently they are of some use and very near 'analogs' in their own right; e.g. "methylphenidate impurity C" = (2RS)-2-Phenyl-2-[(2R)-piperidin-2-yl]ethanamide & "Bis-methylphenidate Impurity" = 1,2-Bis(carboxymethylbenzyl)piperidine etc. Nagelfar (talk) 21:38, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Other ring-constrained derivatives that are not 'rotationally restricted' (RRA) MPH analogs (i.e. 2-((1,3-dioxan-2-yl)(phenyl)methyl)piperidine)

2-((1,3-dioxan-2-yl)(phenyl)methyl)piperidine Nagelfar (talk) 19:54, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned references in List of methylphenidate analogues

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of List of methylphenidate analogues's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Singh2":

• From Salicylmethylecgonine: Chemistry, Design, and Structure-Activity Relationship of Cocaine Antagonists. Satendra Singh et al. Chem. Rev. 2000, 100. 925-1024. PubMed; Chemical Reviews (Impact Factor: 45.66). 04/2000; 100(3):925-1024 American Chemical Society; 2000 ISSN 0009-2665 ChemInform; May, 16th 2000, Volume 31, Issue 20, doi:10.1002/chin.200020238. Mirror hotlink.
• From List of cocaine analogues: Singh, Satendra; et al. (2000). "Chemistry, Design, and Structure-Activity Relationship of Cocaine Antagonists" (PDF). Chem. Rev. 100 (3): 925–1024. doi:10.1021/cr9700538. PMID 11749256.
• From Cocaine: Singh S (March 2000). "Chemistry, design, and structure-activity relationship of cocaine antagonists" (PDF). Chemical Reviews. 100 (3): 925–1024. doi:10.1021/cr9700538. PMID 11749256. Archived (PDF) from the original on 4 March 2016. Page 970 (46th page of article) first, ninth, and tenth lines
• From List of phenyltropanes: Singh, Satendra (2000). "Chem Inform Abstract: Chemistry, Design, and Structure-Activity Relationship of Cocaine Antagonists" (PDF). ChemInform. 31 (20): no. doi:10.1002/chin.200020238. Mirror hotlink.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 04:59, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Numeric Range/Dashes

In the section Various MPH congener affinity values inclusive of norepinephrine & serotonin, the opening/leading sentence is:

Values for dl-threo-methylphenidate derivatives are the mean (s.d.)[17] of 3—6 determinations, or are the mean of duplicate determinations. Values of other compounds are the mean—s.d. for 3—4 determinations where indicated, or are results of single experiments which agree with the literature. All binding experiments were done in triplicate.[18]

These dashes look wrong. I don't have access to the pubmed article referenced to look at the source context, but it seems these should probably be endashes instead of emdashes, as they're specifying a numeric range. Kimen8 (talk) 13:51, 10 October 2023 (UTC)