ArticleNeuropsychiatric disease and treatment2020
Review of Clinical Outcome Assessments in Pediatric Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder.
Article in Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on prefrontal cortical activation in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: a functional near-infrared spectroscopy study.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
- The Mediatory Role of Executive Functioning on the Association Between Sleep and Both Everyday Memory and ADHD Symptoms in Children and Youth With Down Syndrome.American journal on intellectual and developmental disabilities · 2023Article
- Effect of stimulant medication on loss of control eating in youth with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a prospective, observational case series study protocol.Journal of eating disorders · 2022Article
- Associations between Family Functioning and Symptoms of Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD): A Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeVarious clinical outcome assessments (COAs) are used in clinical research to assess and monitor treatment efficacy in pediatric attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) trials. It is unclear whether the concepts assessed are those that are important to patients and their caregivers. The concepts measured by commonly used COAs in this population have not been explicitly compared.
methodsWe conducted reviews of the qualitative literature to extract information on pediatric ADHD-related concepts reported by pediatric patients, parents, and teachers. Using these concepts, we developed a conceptual framework of pediatric ADHD using both the
resultsOf the 27 COAs found in the empirical literature, 4 COAs assessed only DSM symptoms. The most comprehensive coverage of our conceptual framework was seen in the Swanson, Nolan, and Pelham Rating Scale-DSM-IV (SNAP-IV). Eighteen COAs were used in at least 1 clinical trial: ADHD-Rating Scale-IV (ADHD
conclusionWe identified symptoms and behavioral impacts from qualitative studies in pediatric ADHD that are not included in DSM-based criteria. Most COAs used in pediatric ADHD clinical trials measure only those symptoms listed in the DSM. While these COAs can measure symptom severity, they may not assess the full range of symptoms and impacts important to patients and their caregivers. Future research is needed to measure all concepts important to patients and caregivers within ADHD clinical trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.