Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19763664›Full record

SynthesisEuropean child & adolescent psychiatry2010

Comparing the efficacy of stimulants for ADHD in children and adolescents using meta-analysis.

Stephen V Faraone, Jan Buitelaar

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyMeta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European child & adolescent psychiatry, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04964427 (The Effects of Methylphenidate), which is not on this map. Cited by 167 papers, 17 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
167citing papers in PubMed, 17 pooled it
9.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT04964427 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

The Effects of Methylphenidate (MPH) and Non-invasive Brain Stimulation (tDCS) on Inhibitory Control Children With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)

TypeinterventionalSponsorBambino Gesù Hospital and Research InstituteRan2021 to 2022Enrolled26ConditionsAttention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderArmsMethylphenidate, anodal tDCS, sham tDCS
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

167 citing papers in PubMed, 17 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 472 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Oxidative Stress and ADHD: A Meta-Analysis.Journal of attention disorders · 2015
    Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Pooled it
  17. Pooled it
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

107 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Stephen V FaraoneDepartments of Psychiatry and Neuroscience & Physiology, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY, USA. faraones@upstate.edu
Jan Buitelaar
Radboud University Nijmegen · NLSUNY Upstate Medical University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Stimulants used to treat attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) have been well researched, but comparisons among stimulants are hindered by the absence of direct comparative trials. The goal of this work was to compare the efficacy of methylphenidate and amfetamine formulations through a meta-analysis of double-blind placebo-controlled trials. We analyzed recent published literature on the stimulant therapy of ADHD to describe the variability of drug-placebo effect sizes. A literature search was conducted to identify double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of ADHD in children and adolescents published after 1979. Meta-analysis regression assessed the influence of medication type and study design features on medication effects. Twenty-three trials met criteria and were included in this meta-analysis. These trials studied 11 drugs using 19 different outcome measures of hyperactive, inattentive, or impulsive behavior. We found significant differences between amfetamine and methylphenidate products, even after correcting for study design features that might have confounded the results. Our analyses indicate that effect sizes for amfetamine products are significantly, albeit moderately, greater than those for methylphenidate. We found that most measures of effect from all studies were statistically significant. Our findings suggest that amfetamine products may be moderately more efficacious than methylphenidate products, even after controlling for potentially confounding study design features. This difference in effect size may be due to differences between amfetamine and methylphenidate in the molecular mechanisms involved in facilitating the dopaminergic neurotransmission.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAttention Deficit Disorder with HyperactivityCentral Nervous System StimulantsHumansTreatment OutcomeCentral Nervous System Stimulants

Identifiers

PMID19763664
OpenAlexW2099805984

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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 OpenQuestion graph.