ArticleJournal of paediatrics and child health2026
Evaluation of Guanfacine Prescribing Practices for Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder Management: A Retrospective Medical Records Within a Child Development Service.
Article in Journal of paediatrics and child health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimGuanfacine is a second line option for management of Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder (ADHD) and can be prescribed adjunctively with stimulants or as monotherapy. This medical record review evaluated prescribing practices, vital sign changes over time, and client outcomes.
methodsThis retrospective medical record review examined 171 records of clients on guanfacine modified release within the Child Development Service (CDS) in Perth, WA, between February 22, 2022, and May 5, 2022. Clients on guanfacine for one week or less were excluded; those who had ceased guanfacine at the time of review were included.
resultsClinicians completed serial vital sign measurements during guanfacine titration for 92 clients (54.12%), partially completed them for 58 clients (34.12%), and did not complete them for 20 clients (11.76%). No significant changes in systolic/diastolic blood pressures or heart rate were observed following guanfacine prescription. Clients on adjunctive therapy reported fewer side effects than those on monotherapy, 26.7% vs. 50.0%, χ2 (1, N = 166) = 9.59, p = 0.02. This relationship was strongest in clients with an Autism diagnosis, 20.0% vs. 51.6%, χ2 (1, N = 61) = 6.61, p = 0.01. A similar but not significant trend was observed in children with ADHD alone, 25.8% vs. 63.6%, χ2 (1, N = 60) = 3.26, p = 0.071.
conclusionsClients prescribed guanfacine adjunctively with stimulants reported fewer side effects compared to monotherapy, supporting early adjunctive use in suitable cases. Blood pressure and heart rate remained stable across the cohort. Serial vital sign measurement was performed in 50% of cases.
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.