Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27410907›Full record

Trial reportJournal of child and adolescent psychopharmacology2017

Effect of Atomoxetine Treatment on Reading and Phonological Skills in Children with Dyslexia or Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Comorbid Dyslexia in a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial.

Sally Shaywitz, Bennett Shaywitz, Linda Wietecha, Sharon Wigal, Keith McBurnett, David Williams, William G Kronenberger, Stephen R Hooper

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of child and adolescent psychopharmacology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Neural Noise Hypothesis of Developmental Dyslexia.Trends in cognitive sciences · 2017
    Review
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

8 authors.

Sally Shaywitz1 Yale Center for Dyslexia & Creativity , New Haven, Connecticut.
Bennett Shaywitz1 Yale Center for Dyslexia & Creativity , New Haven, Connecticut.
Linda Wietecha2 Eli Lilly and Company and/or one of its subsidiaries , Indianapolis, Indiana.
Sharon Wigal3 AVIDA, Inc. , Newport Beach, California.
Keith McBurnett4 Department of Psychiatry, University of California , San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
David Williams5 inVentiv Health Clinical , Indianapolis, Indiana.
William G Kronenberger6 Department of Psychiatry, Indiana University School of Medicine , Indianapolis, Indiana.
Stephen R Hooper7 School of Medicine, University of North Carolina , Chapel Hill, North Carolina.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesEvaluated the effects of atomoxetine on the reading abilities of children with dyslexia only or attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and comorbid dyslexia.

methodsChildren aged 10-16 years (N = 209) met Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) criteria for dyslexia only (n = 58), ADHD and comorbid dyslexia (n = 124), or ADHD only (n = 27) and were of normal intelligence. Patients were treated with atomoxetine (1.0-1.4 mg/kg/day) or placebo in a 16-week, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial. The dyslexia-only and ADHD and comorbid dyslexia groups were randomized 1:1; the ADHD-only group received atomoxetine in a blinded manner. Reading abilities were measured with the Woodcock Johnson III (WJIII), Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing (CTOPP), Gray Oral Reading Tests-4, and Test of Word Reading Efficiency.

resultsAtomoxetine-treated dyslexia-only patients compared with placebo patients had significantly greater improvement (p < 0.02) with moderate to approaching high effect sizes (ES) on WJIII Word Attack (ES = 0.72), Basic Reading Skills (ES = 0.48), and Reading Vocabulary (ES = 0.73). In the atomoxetine-treated ADHD and comorbid dyslexia group, improvement on the CTOPP Elision measure (ES = 0.50) was significantly greater compared with placebo (p < 0.02). Total, inattentive, and hyperactive/impulsive ADHD symptom reductions were significant in the atomoxetine-treated ADHD and comorbid dyslexia group compared with placebo, and from baseline in the ADHD-only group (p ≤ 0.02). ADHD symptom improvements in the ADHD and comorbid dyslexia group were not correlated with improvements in reading.

conclusionsAtomoxetine treatment improved reading scores in patients with dyslexia only and ADHD and comorbid dyslexia. Improvements for patients with dyslexia only were in critical components of reading, including decoding and reading vocabulary. For patients with ADHD and comorbid dyslexia, improvements in reading scores were distinct from improvement in ADHD inattention symptoms alone. These data represent the first report of improvements in reading measures following pharmacotherapy treatment in patients with dyslexia only evaluated in a randomized, double-blind trial.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdrenergic Uptake InhibitorsAtomoxetine HydrochlorideAttention Deficit Disorder with HyperactivityChildDouble-Blind MethodDyslexiaFemaleHumansMaleReadingTreatment OutcomeAdrenergic Uptake InhibitorsAtomoxetine HydrochlorideADHDatomoxetineattentioncomorbid dyslexiadyslexiareadingvocabulary

Identifiers

PMID27410907
PMCPMC5327054

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.