Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29767387›Full record

ArticleChild psychiatry and human development2018

No Medication for My Child! A Naturalistic Study on the Treatment Preferences for and Effects of Cogmed Working Memory Training Versus Psychostimulant Medication in Clinically Referred Youth with ADHD.

Peter Muris, Dorien Roodenrijs, Lut Kelgtermans, Sonja Sliwinski, Ulrike Berlage, Hanna Baillieux, Anne Deckers, Marieke Gunther, Bertien Paanakker, Ida Holterman

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Child psychiatry and human development, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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.

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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Peter MurisDepartment of Clinical Psychological Science, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands. peter.muris@maastrichtuniversity.nl.ORCID 0000-0001-5447-8200
Dorien RoodenrijsLucertis (Virenze-RIAGG) Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Lut KelgtermansLucertis (Virenze-RIAGG) Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Sonja SliwinskiLucertis (Virenze-RIAGG) Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Ulrike BerlageLucertis (Virenze-RIAGG) Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Hanna BaillieuxLucertis (Virenze-RIAGG) Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Anne DeckersDepartment of Clinical Psychological Science, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Marieke GuntherLucertis (Virenze-RIAGG) Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Bertien PaanakkerLucertis (Virenze-RIAGG) Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Ida HoltermanDepartment of Clinical Psychological Science, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Virenze · NLMaastricht University · NLStellenbosch University · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this naturalistic clinical study, we explored the applicability and clinical effectiveness of Cogmed WMT, pharmacotherapy, and their combination for clinically referred children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Ninety youth with ADHD (ages 6-16 years) and their parents were offered the possibility to choose one of the three interventions. The motives for choosing various interventions were quite different. Medication was chosen because this treatment was expected to be most effective, but also because the Cogmed WMT program was regarded as too taxing. The choice for Cogmed WMT was mainly negatively motivated: participants tended to be strongly against the use of medication, found it a too rigorous step, or feared side effects and addiction problems. The choice for the combination treatment was strongly positively motivated: parents and youth indicated that they wanted to receive the best possible intervention and part of them also had high expectations of Cogmed WMT. In terms of clinical effectiveness, pharmacotherapy with stimulant medication and the combination treatment produced larger reductions in ADHD symptomatology than Cogmed WMT. Further, results indicated that Cogmed WMT selectively enhanced working memory performance. Finally, after conducting Cogmed WMT, youths and parents were more 'open' to accept pharmacotherapy as intervention, probably because the training increased greater insight in and awareness of the problematic features of ADHD.

Indexed as

ParentsPatient PreferenceAdolescentAttention Deficit Disorder with HyperactivityAwarenessCentral Nervous System StimulantsChildCombined Modality TherapyFemaleHumansMaleMemory, Short-TermTreatment OutcomeCentral Nervous System StimulantsAttention-deficit/hyperactivity disorderClinical effectivenessCogmed working memory trainingNaturalistic clinical studyStimulant medicationTreatment preferences

Identifiers

PMID29767387
PMCPMC6208996
OpenAlexW2804662051

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.