ReviewCNS drugs2026
Candidate Clinico-Demographic Predictors or Moderators of Efficacy and Tolerability of Pharmacological Treatment in Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD): An Analysis of the MED-ADHD Repository of Randomised Controlled Trials.
Review in CNS drugs, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated that pharmacotherapy reduces symptoms of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) at a group level, but efficacy and tolerability vary across individuals. Clinico-demographic characteristics may act as predictors and/or moderators of treatment efficacy and tolerability, but systematic evidence remains limited. Therefore, we systematically analysed RCTs of ADHD medications to identify potential demographic and clinical predictors/moderators of efficacy and tolerability across the lifespan.
methodsRandomised controlled trials were identified from the MED-ADHD database ( https://med-adhd.org/ ), a repository of RCTs of medications for ADHD in children, adolescents and adults. The database is based on systematic searches of multiple electronic sources, including PubMed, BIOSIS Previews, CINAHL, the Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials and EMBASE, and is also complemented by unpublished data obtained from manufacturers and study authors. We used the most recent (2026) version of MED-ADHD. The risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB 2).
resultsAmong the 171 RCTs screened, 62 assessed clinico-demographic factors as possible predictors or moderators of treatment efficacy and tolerability. Age was the most examined characteristic (56.4%) followed by, among the top five, psychiatric comorbidities (53.2%), sex (46.8%), baseline ADHD symptom severity (27.4%), and ADHD presentation (24.2%). Most RCTs reported no significant findings although there was preliminary evidence of associations with age (17.7%), psychiatric comorbidities (17.7%), baseline ADHD symptom severity (16.1%), sex (11.3%), and ADHD presentation (4.8%). Risk of bias was rated high in 37% of RCTs.
conclusionsStringent sample selection and reliance on group-level analyses may limit the power to detect predictors and moderators of treatment efficacy and tolerability in classical RCTs. Consequently, the current evidence provides limited and inconsistent guidance on clinically meaningful predictors/moderators. However, variables such as age, psychiatric comorbidities, sex, baseline severity and ADHD presentation have been the most frequently examined with positive findings and may hold promise. Future research should prioritise individual participant data meta-analyses of RCTs, alongside well-powered analyses of a comprehensive observational dataset, to more robustly investigate these associations and support treatment stratification through predictive models.
Identifiers
42595937What 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.